veal05

First of all, this is a great forum...with lots of info. Thank you all for that.

I'm 35 now and very surprised to see all the options available nowadays. I only remember the names Ross, Schwinn, Huffy when I was younger. They all came with kickstands, pedals, etc. I saw a post in the forum that said some bikes are sold w/o pedals. Really?

Anyway, my wife and I are looking for bikes for:
exercise, neighborhood riding, bike paths here and there, nothing too distant, comfort is key

I have not been to a local store but there seems to be a pretty good one in my area and they carry Trek, Cannondale, Fisher, Lemond, Look, Orbea, Bell, Giro, Thule and more. (website says so - hah).

What sizes should we be looking at?
5'10" for me
5'2" for her

The Treks look nice and lots of members here seem to like them.

Recommendations?

Burningman

Thats a pretty great selection actually.

The Lemond,Look brands tend toward entry level and beyond racers,they don't really venture far from it.

The Trek,Cannondale , have racers but also cross into the general purpose and touring areas.

The others I'm not too familiar with.

For your requirements I would say stick with the Trek and Cannondale companies.

And yes,a lot of bikes come without pedals these days.

Because one either has a system they're happy with(clips,clipless,platform,whatever) and want that on there new bike so one doesn't need to change shoes switching from one bike to another.Or they are switching bikes altogether and switch the pedals over to stay with the same shoes.

(This can be quite an extensive topic on it's own...find the thread where somebody asked "which pedals do you use?" and you'll find quite the mix)

But for your purposes a basic flat platform pedal system will work fine and are inexpensive

Nice to have you with us,sorry can't be more help

KingTermite 

Usually you can just test ride bikes, so I'd try test riding a few styles to see what works best for you. If it is truly just neighborhood cruising and you are sure it won't get into something more serious (and you don't have big hills), then I'd look into a cruiser style bike. My next guess on styles would be a comfort style bike (my first bike was a Trek Navigator comfort bike) or a hybrid style.

Once you get the style of bike you like, test ride all the bikes of that style from every brand you can find a bike shop for, then buy from the cheapest or one you like the best.

wrafl

Trek, Cannondale and (Gary)Fisher make comfort/hybrid bikes that would surely meet your need.

ericgu

A local store that carries those bikes should be able to find a bike that fits your budget and your body.

Rex G

Welcome! I got back into bicycling at about age 35 myself, after a lay-off since about age 18, so I know where you are coming from. This was a decade ago, so I had had totally missed the intro of such things as clipless pedals, and indexed shifting, so had a lot of catching-up to do. Regarding bikes without pedals installed at the factory, that is totally normal, and good, as pedals are very personal. As for fit, well, you can't use height to judge bike size. My son is 3 inches taller than me, but that does not mean he rides a bigger bike size. In the USA, bikes are generally sized vertically, along the seat tube from the center of the bottom bracket to a point along the seat tube. A place to start is one's inseam, which is not quite the same as the inseam size of the pants you buy. (It is measured from floor to crotch.) Then, there is the ideal distance from saddle to handlebar, and is determined by taking into account torso length and arm length. It is BEST to find a good bike shop who will take the time to fit the rider; they will take measurements, recommend a bike size, and then put you on a bike to fine-tune all of this while observing your riding position. Yes, this IS all worth it! A poorly fitted bike can cause discomfort, and even one that feels good may cause problems somewhere, such as the knees. Hint: if this turns out to be more expensive than anticipated, make sure HER bike is the better one, to start with.

Rex G

A few more thoughts: Fit is somewhat subjective; two very good local independent bike shops have fitted me, and one says I am best served by a 57 cm bike, and another fitted me with a 59 cm bike, and this is within the same brand, Bianchi. (I am 6'-00'') Both sizes work OK for me, but above or below these sizes are noticeably less than optimal. It should be noted that not all brands use same method to size their bikes! Bianchi and some others use the center-to-top method, others use center-to-center. The latter figure in each method refers to the top tube, and to complicate things, that only works if the top tube is truly horizontal. Many modern frames do not have horizontal top tube, either because they are "compact geometry" frames, or for some other design reason. I just wanted to mention that in case you are tempted to get a fitting, and then go out on your own with a tape measure to find yourself a bike from another source.

Doug5150

For comfort, get a recumbent: the Sun EZ-1 and Cycle Genius Starling are two lower-priced models. For an "upright-style" bike, consider the RANS Fusion (-also there are the Day6Bicycles and Lightfoot Surefoot, but I have no direct experience with them).

They cost more and they look wierd--but the thing here is, they don't hurt to ride. If you buy the same kind of bicycle, you'll get the same kind of pain. The recumbents and the RANS crank-forwards don't require padded shorts at all (recumbent shorts don't have any padding!), there's little-to-no hand pressure to cause numbness, and your head is level, so neck strain isn't an issue.
------
If you absolutely insist on getting "normal" bicycles, then save some money and buy them used.
Craigslist is full of people who made the mistake of buying normal bicycles, and found out the hard way that they're too painful to enjoy riding.
You can learn what they learned for much less than what they spent.
~

cyccommute 

At 35, you shouldn't be that surprised...the US has been in the middle of a bike boom for the last 30 years You, like most people, just weren't paying attention.

[QUOTE=veal05]Anyway, my wife and I are looking for bikes for:
exercise, neighborhood riding, bike paths here and there, nothing too distant, comfort is key

Okay: Trek, Cannondale, Fisher, Lemond, Orbea and Look are bicycle companies. There are lots of others as well. Bell and Giro are helmet makers. Thule makes racks for your car to carry your bikes.

For your purposes, what Burningman said is correct. Cannondale, Trek and Fisher carry bikes that will meet your needs. You probably want to look at 'comfort bikes' or hybrids for the kind of riding you think you want to do. Don't look to spend a little as you can. You do get a better bike for more money. In the Trek line, for example, the 7000 series hybrid bikes are okay but you'll outgrow them very quickly. I'd look at the fitness bikes (7.x FX series). The cheapest one is a much better bike, in my opinion, then the similarly priced hybrid bike.

For a 5'10" average male, you are probably going to want to look at a 20" or 22" in the Fx series bikes. You need about an inch (or 2) clearance between the bike and the nether bits when you are standing flat footed over the bike. If you happen to look at mountain bikes, you need more ...3" or more... clearance. Also you want a bike that 'feels' comfortable when you reach for the handlebars. That means that you don't want to feel like a hunch back (too short) or that you are reaching for the bars (too long). You want a comfortable medium.

The problems start with women...especially small women...they are tough to fit. Their legs are long (in relation to their torso...what we guys like about 'em ) and their arms are shorter. Bikes tend to be made for men, not women, so to get the proper height, the top tube (that reach to the handlebars) is longer. Try riding a bike that is too big for you with a long top tube to get a feel for what your wife would have to go through. I'd suggest looking at a Trek WSD (woman specific design) 7.2 FX in no bigger than a 15". The same clearance issues apply to her as to you.

Another thing to consider for your wife is to spend more money on her bike. Money equals weight...or rather lack of weight Women don't have the muscle mass of us guys and, generally, a lighter bike will make the ride more pleasurable. For example a 30 lb bike is on 17% of the body weight of an average 180 lb male but it's nearly 30% of the body weight of a 110 lb female. So she's trying to push nearly a third of her body weight with less muscle to do it.

veal05

Thank you for the replies.

I've tested a few bikes at the LBS and, at first, I tried the 20" models....Trek 7200 & Trek 7.3 FX. I liked the FX model better than the non FX but then I tried a 17.5" Gary Fisher Nirvana. That was by far the most comfortable and the best fit for me (plus I like the gear set up better than the 7200 grip style).

I think next time out, I'm going to try out the Fisher Zebrano (can't help but thinking of Zambrano..as in Carlos when I'm saying or writing it).

There was a button above the front right tire on the Nirvana to take off the suspension or to put it back on. Have you come across this feature? I'm not too familiar with the pros/cons of both and didn't notice too much of a difference on my test run.

I'm thinking a 17.5" is better for me. I'd like to have at least 1" to 1.5" between...me and the bike when standing flatfoot and 20" was a tad too tall for my liking.

Any Nirvana, Zebrano fans out there?