bikesdirect_com

A bunch of questions about these bikes

https://publicbikes.com/Bikes

https://www.linusbike.com/models/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERBfFx1VW1Q



1 - What would you call them? Retro-city bikes? Dutch bikes? English-racer [what we called them in the 60s]? Or something else?
2 – Have you seen more new ones in use in your area?
3 – How much do you think bikes like this should sell for? In 1-speed? In 3-speed?
4 – If you were going to get one would you want SS of IGH? Would you want matching rear rack?
5 – Is traditional steel attractive to you; would you prefer aluminum; or does it matter?

silentlysailing

I like the term retro city. In my opinion dutch bikes are full featured and a bit heavier.

fuzz2050

Dutch bikes are from the Netherlands, usually weight as much as the rider, and more often than not are bought from a drug addict on a corner.

English Racer is a major misnomer, since they are neither English, nor for racing. Retro-city bike doesn't make much sense, since they aren't retro, and the idea of a 'city bike' varies so much from person to person as to be useless.

however, those bikes are obviously trying for the 'Dutch style' so how about 'Neo-Dutch'?

or 'Dutch-esque'

If I were to buy one, I would want it to come well appointed, fenders and a rack included. Mounts for a chain guard would be nice.

I think the major feature of these would have to be cost, it's destined to be used as a beater city bike, so keep it simple. Single speed (but please no coaster brakes), no fancy features like dynamo hubs, and priced as low as you can get it. I think steel would have more appeal, but either would work, for the right price.

Also, can I put myself on the list for a sample? I think there is a market for low priced commuters out there that isn't being met.

clasher

I like the simple term 'City Bike' myself. Many older Schwinn/CCM/Raleigh bikes have some of the features (or all) of Dutch bikes and I think calling them english racers is a bit silly too. There were some neat three-speed road bikes from the 50s and they had a good thread in C&V about what to call them.

Make one like your kilo-WT, but put 90mm drum brakes on it (have a braze-on for the reaction arms), a dyno and a full aluminum chaincase... can't beat that for an all-weather and stylish city bike... throw in everything like rack, lights and fenders or sell it as an add-on. Easy to make one with drops and one with cruiser bars if you use SA hubs and their different shifters. An aluminum frame and stainless hardware would be worth a few more bucks to me... Torker Graduate is a decent example, but they cheap out on the seatpost and those SA gripshifts are kind of goofy if you ask me. SA thumb shifters or the trigger shifters seem much nicer choices to put on a retro-themed bike and I find them much easier to use. Yeah... that's a dream build for sure eh

Fizzaly

Retro-City bike for sure, and of course steel that is just a silly question

kludgefudge

1) City bikes. Yes it is a fairly broad term but they are basically purpose built for urban transportation. (read: not hybrids)

2) not really.older MTB's and modern hybrids are the norm for "city bikes" my city bike is an old raleigh monger with a triple mtn chainring so I have a nice bailout granny for the big hills. There also are not any dealers selling a good selection of this kind of product.

3) $300ish(single) - $600ish(5 speed). I think Torker is probably offering the best value in this area. That said, people see the prices of say, the Linus bikes and say "overpriced". These are not exactly mass produced and therefore their premium prices makes sense. I realize they are not a great value, but I doubt the companies manufacturing them could afford to sell them much cheaper.

4) I would want the IGH. If I were to buy a new bike for real world city use tomorrow it would be the Torker Graduate. 5 speed internal, fenders, drum brakes....and all for less than $600. I believe for 2011 it has the thumb shifter and not the gripshift, which is a bonus.

5) A lot of these bikes are built with cheap Hi-tensile steel instead of the better Cro-moly that most "good" steel bikes are made from. A lot of people whine about this, but personally I think these folks have developed an unhealthy bias from their immersion in the sport and recreation orientated "bike culture". The way I see it, utilitarian city bikes do not need to be made from double butted Reynolds 531. I would rather the money be put into better quality brakes/shifters/wheels etc. when trying to make a decent city bike for a low price.

tcs

If I was describing them or marketing them?

English Racer is a great marketing hook, just as it was 45 years ago.

kludgefudge

IMHO "Roadster" is a good descriptive term for them.

as a side note I would avoid the use of the word "retro" at all costs.

fietsbob

Transportation.

fuzz2050

I would completely disagree with this sentiment, I would much rather have a nice frame with simple components (Single speed, long reach calliper brakes) than a fully equipped bike built around a heavy hi-ten frame. It's been my experience that frames made from nicer tubing simply ride better. Everything else can be upgraded, but a frame is pretty much set.

It would be nice to break out from the idea that city bikes have to be about simple utilitarianism. A bike can ride well and be practical at the same time.

clasher

I'd agree that a nice, light frame makes for an easier time riding it too, hence my suggestion for an aluminum frame, but something the kilo WT would work as a nice base too. Paint seems pretty robust these days so rust isn't a huge concern with steel.

adgmobile

i would call them bikes. they are what used to be a general purpose bike. before everything was mtb.

Eileen

I tend to call my Retrovelo a "city bike."

interested

As a class of bikes, choose "city bikes". A individual model could be called "English Roadster" after its type. "Retro" is bad, choose "Classic" instead. "Racer" also give the wrong associations.
IMHO, the female market isn't so focused on names and brands, they do pay great attention to looks and practicality however. "Classic ladies bike" or just "Classic bike", "Classic city bike" or "City bike" is what grabs their attention, much more than "Dutch de Luxe", "Velochiq" or whatever fancy name the particular model gets.


Well, yes, but I live in Copenhagen. I assume your are more interested in US trends.


No idea about the price range.

Note however, that single speed ladies bike simply doesn't sell anymore here in flat Denmark. Single speed is selling greater than ever, but almost only to men.
IMHO, women wants to arrive at their destination without the sweat dripping down their forehead, so when the wind is up, they want to gear down and take it slower rather than just work harder. I think it is more a matter of style than fitness or strength.

As a minimum I would like a 3 speed SRAM IGH and a Torpedo thumb shifter. (I could perhaps consider a SS if it came with a real F&S Torpedo hub ;-) ).
For female bikes a matching rear rack is essential. Same color is best, but at least it should be harmonious looking together with the bike. Eg. if the frame is pastel blue and the rack is aluminum colored, match it with a aluminum basket in front.
Black, Dark green/BRG, Light blue and red are the most popular color choices for ladies bikes her in Copenhagen, and the trend is definitely to make the frame and rack in the same color.


For classic ladies bikes, steel is the only choice when it comes to the correct elegant look. Aluminum tubing can work too, but it is difficult to make it elegant because the tubing gets so wide.
For men, either material could work, depending on the model. Eg. if you want a classic English Roadster with full chaincase, in dark bottle green or British Racing Green, then steel is the obvious choice. For a more generic city bike, whatever that costs less.

--
Regards

FunkyStickman

1. I call them "Cool."
2. Never seen one locally.
3. I think they're overpriced... but then again, I think 99% of bikes are overpriced.
4. I'd have to have the IGH version, I'm too out of shape to SS it everywhere.
5. Frame material doesn't matter. Aluminum is fine, but by the time you build an AL frame to be as reliable as a steel one, you've lost most of the weight advantage. Six of one, half a dozen of the other. I use whatever I can get my hands on that fits.

wahoonc

+1

I do agree with an earlier poster that Torker is going to give you the most bang for the buck. Biggest problem for me is too many companies stop their sizing short of the XL. My road bike size is a 65cm...

Aaron

Stradavarius

Call'm Amstel Light Bikes...since they will be lite duty Dutch bikes right?

nashcommguy

Look, as long as you're going to be allowed to troll the least you can do is get out of the Pac-Rim and try to import some 'real' Euro-bikes like this one: https://www.quitmann-ms.de/eng/big_apple.html# Now that's a 'City Bike'. E1,374.00 w/a Shimano 7 sp. Or one can go the distance and get a 14 sp Rohloff for E2486.00. They're made in Gemany and are the best example of a 'City Bike' I can find anywhere.

kludgefudge

Yes, you would prefer the nice frame with lesser amenities, but that is because you are a cycling enthusiast who I am guessing at the very least knows how to set up their own brakes, can maybe even true a wheel, and is willing to sweat it out up a hill; in the name of owning a bike that "rides better".

Now, I don't think there is anything wrong with this, but your average joe or josie looking for a urban utility bike, who may not be mechanically inclined or a strong rider, is better off with the multispeed and the drum brakes.

soymateofeo

We'd call that, "one of those old school style city cruiser chingaderas!"

tjspiel

I'd vote for aluminum too as long as you can make it lighter than an equivalent chromoly bike. I've seen some cheap aluminum bikes that might as well have been made from steel.

And no, this is not because I'm all about performance. I do use a bike nearly every day though and a lighter bike is just plain easier to live with all else being equal. Whether it's bringing them up a few stairs or even just maneuvering them around a bike rack.

Rehashing a classic design is fine but to me there's no reason not to take an opportunity to improve on them while you're at it. They used steel in the 50's, 60's and 70's because there were no practical alternatives. Now there are.

Some will argue that by the time you put generator hubs, IGHs and everything else on them, they're going to be heavy anyway. To me that's all the more reason to use lighter materials when possible.

WhyFi

After looking at several brands/models, my wife decided that the Linus Dutchi 3 was the one for her, so we bought it; one of the newer shops in my area carries the Linus line.

1) "Cruiser" or "city cruiser" seems apt, to me, with beach cruisers having bigger, fatter tires, maybe a longer wheelbase.
2) As is ofter the case, once you have something, you tend to notice it when other people have that same something. Since the purchase of the Linus, I've noticed quite a few people on them in the area (probably 4-1, girls-guys). Maybe they just flew under my radar before or maybe the bike shop that we got it from has been pushin' a hell of a lot of them out the door since (we did have to go with the black frame because the more desirable colors were out of stock and those on the next shipment were already spoken for).
3) Whatever you can get for them. Linus is doing well in the area at $600-700. A 3-speed, with aesthetics that are just as appealing (my wife was mostly sold on looks, the test ride was to confirm that it wasn't horrible), at $400 would rock.
4) There's no way that she would have gone with a SS. Racks were a must, wicker baskets would have just about sealed the deal without a test ride.
5) She doesn't know what the bike is made out of, nor does she care. She would probably appreciate it if the bike were a few pounds lighter, however.

bikesdirect_com

Very interesting
I am sure she will love the Linus; they are nice
and the wicker basket idea is excellent

Also I was thinking 3 to 1 girls over guys
you could be correct at 4 to 1