Bicycle Help

[tommyrott]

the early spd's had float issues and hot spot as well but that has been improved greatly the past 5 years. I stopped riding spd's because of that but having access to a number of full time MTB pro rider's who have to ride what their given it's preety much universal amongst them for spd's . I have also ridden crank bro's candy pedal's which caused me to return to spd's about 2 years ago was really impressed with the improvement. one thing to keep in mind if your going to invest in clipless pedals have a local shop that KNOW'S what their doin help set up your cleats it will save your knee's a lot of grief.

[Dead Man]

Shimano spd's are ok if you hate your knee joints, imho. My personal pref is for speedplay frogs, though I am using a pair of egg beater candy pedals on the catrike, so DH and I won't have to keep swapping pedals when we change riders.

On the catrike, clipless pedals are considered essential life support gear. No joke. Without them you are at an extremely high risk of shattering your leg by running it over with the frame cruciform.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

Definitely want something that "floats," if you're not on a pro-fitted, dedicated road bike. As mentioned above, 3-hole road cleats will lock your foot to the pedal. Other clipless pedals don't hold your foot in a particular position on the pedal. Coming from cyclocross origins, I actually use eggbeaters for everything right now, and I think they're really the best all-around option for anything but dedicated road riding. They let your foot "float," or rotate a bit before releasing, so they don't **** your knees, they hold tight while pedaling but release easily, don't seize up with mud and the bars cut through any mud on your shoe (if this should ever apply to you), and using the 2-hold pattern, you have a great selection of walkable shoes to chose from.

I'm entertaining the idea of trying Speedplays on my next road shoe, though. For a road bike, it looks like a real slick system.

[brickboy240]

You might want to start off with old school toe clips...then go on to clipless.

YES...the power and control afforded by clipless is totally worth it. How else are you going to get the ass-end over logs without hopping? LOL

SPDs are not THAT hard to learn and they are adjustable. They are also tough as nails and not all that expensive.

I guess I am just used to them but once you master clipless...you will not want to ride any other way.

Get a hard tail with a decent fork. Unless you are going to drop 3-4 grand on a bike...stay far away from the lower cost dual suspension bikes. They are heavy, complicated and the shocks are usually crap and need an immediate upgrade. This is the mistake I made with the XC-104 KHS I bought. The rear shock was so squirrely, I had to replace it with an air-oil Rock Shox unit. Made it better but the bike is still on the heavy side and I prefer my old Fisher hard tail because it is lighter and more responsive.

The Trek and Cannondales in the 900-1200 range are a really nice place to start. Go much cheaper and you are getting crappy components that wear out too soon, extra weight and corners cut on things like seat, tires and rims. A bike in this range will also be easier for you to power, control, brake and ride all day without it beating you to death.

Good luck and welcome to the addiction...

-brickboy240

[TehLlama]

The Trek and Cannondales in the 900-1200 range are a really nice place to start. Go much cheaper and you are getting crappy components that wear out too soon, extra weight and corners cut on things like seat, tires and rims. A bike in this range will also be easier for you to power, control, brake and ride all day without it beating you to death.

Good luck and welcome to the addiction...

-brickboy240

The Trek Mamba is one hell of a deal, that's definitely my default recommendation for most folks.

As far as clipless, I run flats and ride slightly gnarlier stuff, so the skill to clear logs without clips can definitely be learned (albeit more easily with 29ers, more so with FS 29ers known for square bump compliance like mine).

Anything less that hydraulic brakes, solo air shocks (the RockShox Recon are about my quality floor - for lighter people the Raidon's are usable) is like buying an RRA rifle.

[brickboy240]

Wow...that Trek Mamba IS a good deal for the money. Since I have not bought a bike in a long time or paid much attention to Trek...I guess I missed that one.

You get a workable fork, Bontrager quality rims and components and decent deraileurs that could be upgraded later if needed. For the money...that is a totally worthy bike. The only thing I would change is to Shimano SPD pedals and I could totally get by on that bike.

All of my 3 bikes are 26'ers so I have no experience with a 29" mt bike. Since I have a 30" inseam....all the 29" bikes seem huge to me. YMMV.

-brickboy240

[Dead Man]

Since the OP has indicated he is still in the market, I will make my recommendation.

It sounds like you (OP) don't quite know exactly what you'll be using the bike for. You indicate mild road riding and want some mild off-road ability. My guess, based on experience with helping other bike-newbies, is that once you get on the bike and start using it you'll discover that you definitely have a preference for one or the other: you'll like off-roading, and will generally only do it and will want something that does it well, or; you'll like road-riding and will generally only do it and will want something that does it well. People try to buy bikes that will do both reasonably well when they're not exactly sure what they want, and they do produce bikes that make a decent attempt at facilitating that market, but it's still a compromise. We all know that compromise is generally..... a compromise.

All of that said, I would definitely skip the mountain bike, if you think you'll be doing any road riding. Mountain bikes, especially suspension bikes, are wonderful for rough off-roading, but suck for everything else. They are slow and heavy; the exact opposite of what you want on the road. To eek any pleasure from a road ride, you need an efficient machine; something that will not resist your every pedal stroke. This means higher gearing for higher speed, smooth tires (which you want for all purposes except damp off-road, contrary to overwhelming popular opinion), light weight, longer cranks, and better aerodynamics. And all of these things will have a marked effect on your performance for just casual road riding; I'm not talking racing here. Even at 12-15 MPH (slow, for a road bike) all of these things will matter.

Mountain bikes are like being in "low" 4x4 in your truck. With short gearing you can power up short, muddy hills. Fat, knobby tires chew up rocks and roots and holes. Suspension, and extra weight, absorb wrist-and-shoulder-punishing impact. But no fun on pavement.

Cyclocross bikes are really the only exception to this compromise, and are probably really a lot more appropriate for what most people who want this dual-capability will actually do with the bike. With a cyclocross bike, you can still go very fast and actually enjoy a road ride, but it will still tackle, and tackle well, the kind of off-roading you describe. The frames are beefier but still in road configuration, the wheels are stronger but will in efficient 700c road size, the gearing is slightly lower for better torque off road, but still high enough that non-roadies will never spin out on the flats, bossed cantilever brakes that won't seize up with snow/ice/mud/woodland debris, etc. But being, essentially, just beefed up road bikes, you can still configure them almost exactly like a road bike for great efficient road riding. I use a cyclocross frame for a long-distance commuter, and regularly pass other commuters like they are standing still, and even give roadies a run for their money; frequently beating them on impromptu races also.

Keep a set of 23 or 25 tires for 90% of your cycling needs, and have a set of knobby cross tires for when you're going to do wet or serious off-road riding.

And if you ever had an itch to race, cyclocross races in the fall are a hell of a lot of fun. Not nearly the elitist ****wad attitude you get at road races.

[Trifecta]

GT peace9r
29 in single speed single track mountain bike.

No gears, no special tools and basic maintenance is simple.

[TehLlama]

All of my 3 bikes are 26'ers so I have no experience with a 29" mt bike. Since I have a 30" inseam....all the 29" bikes seem huge to me. YMMV.

I'm 6'2", so the 29" wheels are a much better fit. For anything in between, the 27.5" '650B' wheel size fits in between - a lot of the rollover ability of the wagon wheel 29ers, but a lot of the compact strength and lightness of the 26" wheels.

For my uses, I wind up taking my 120mm travel mountain bike on roads a ton - just cram 50psi in the tires and I can keep up with all but the fit road bikers, but I abuse all 4.7" of travel when riding off road like an idiot, so that's the compromise that makes sense for me.

For limited off-road, a cyclocross bike is money - with disk brakes, and decent drivetrain, unless you're going over drops or having to clear softball or larger sized rocks, a cyclocross can do it all.

[brickboy240]

In the age of texting...I try to not ride my bike on the streets any more than I have to. It is just too damn dangerous these days. Nobody is paying attention to my 4x4 Tundra...let alone me on a bike! LOL

Yeah, he might want to look at a cyclo-cross bike. I forgot about those because around here...there are two camps of riders. The laid back, dirty but cool mt bikers and the elitist skinny tire road guys. Most times...the groups don't play well together.

There are some narrow mt bike tires that can be aired up to higher pressures and used on the road and they will fell better than the stock knobbies. Putting those on a mt bike might be cheaper than the cheapest cyclo-cross bikes I have seen. You can also change cogs and chain rings on any mt bike so it is not as if one is stuck with lower gears.

I agree that full suspension is a total waste for mostly on-road riding. Adds weight and complexity. However, a suspension fork can be an aid if you travel on torn up city streets. Those thin skinny tires on road bikes will beat you to death! LOL

The choices these days are indeed wide open...

-brickboy240

[Dead Man]

In the age of texting...I try to not ride my bike on the streets any more than I have to. It is just too damn dangerous these days. Nobody is paying attention to my 4x4 Tundra...let alone me on a bike! LOL

I do about 200 miles a week on the road, most of that on rural highways. I've had plenty of uncomfortable moments, but I've never had anything I'd call a "close call" on the highway. Riding around the city, however - many close calls. Oddly enough, the closest calls I've had were when motorists have seen me at the last minute and hit their brakes - right smack in my path. Just go, dammit!

I've never yet actually collided with a vehicle, nor crashed to avoid being hit. Basically all of my cycling friends have, and every single instance has been in the city. And by city, I mean down-town type city, with low speeds and lots of stop signs and things going on all over the place. Fortunately, these have all been low-impact, low-consequence collisions. One of my closest friends was hit by a pickup truck a few nights ago. Knocked him to the ground; he was otherwise fine. Didn't even bother mentioning to the driver that he is a lawyer.

Obviously the consequences are greater on highways and suburban roads, but having a good day-light-bright blinky and staying on the shoulder seem to mitigate the risk. I feel very safe once I get out of the city.