v70cat

https://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/...bikes-800-1269

Andy_K 

I think the assumption of the media and marketing types when declaring something to be a "commuter" bike is that nobody would commute by bike for more than a few miles. Or maybe that anyone who commutes by bike more than a few miles is going to do other things with their bikes. The problem with these Editor's Choice kind of commuter bikes isn't that they make bad choices, it's that the category is very limited.

For getting around a flat city, that Breezer is probably great (unless you need to carry it up stairs or load it onto a bus).

Besides, they're not going to sell many ads by telling you that a '91 Trek 820 makes a good commuter.

FunkyStickman

You'll get two schools of thinking in this area: race bikes with racks, and do-it-all heavy duty purpose-built commuter bikes. This one falls into the latter category.

If you want to commute on a road/race bike, that's fine, but it's not made for that. 37 pounds isn't heavy for a commuter bike.

Fizzaly

+1 for that mine without bags weights 39lbs

AlmostGreenGuy

My commuter bike is exactly 37 pounds. It gets to feeling a bit heavy on a steep hill when I'm 25 miles into my 30-mile round trip commute. But other than the wicked hills, 37 pounds is not a real problem. Once the bike is moving, it rolls very well. You don't even notice the extra weight. What makes the bike so heavy also makes the ride very plush. I feel no vibration, and fear no pothole.

Andy_K 

Such a description need not require a 35+ pound bike:



This one, which I maintain meets all the descriptives above, comes in just under 26 pounds as shown.

v70cat

Why not put some fenders on this bike and call it a "race" commuter?

https://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/...-bikes-679-725

Fizzaly

I've tried several times to run road bikes in several configurations to commute on I just don't like the 700c wheels, I prefer 26" that is my preference of course, But that would make a quick and pretty good priced commuter.

531phile 

https://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/...-bikes-679-725

This old and tired product pushing machine is perpetuating the myth that flat bars are "comfortable". Hahahahahhahahah!!!! Try riding that pass 20 miles and tell me how your wrist/hands feel. I know it is a personal preference, but you find most seasoned riders on drop bars for a reason: More Hand positions = More comfort, not one static and unnatural "flat" bar position.

FunkyStickman

Doesn't require a 35+ pound bike, but it's not considered "heavy" for commuting either.

531phile 

About the Breezer commuter bike at 35+ pounds. https://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/...bikes-800-1269

NuVinci = Nice invention, but still in beta...too damn heavy...once they start figuring out how to lighten it, it'll be on every new bike on the market.

ItsJustMe

My commuter is around 37 pounds as well. It's the only bike I own. That weight is with fenders, rack, lights, pump and tool kit.

cyccommute 

When did neutron star material become available for bicycle frames? And why would you want to use it? Because cars want to avoid being trapped in your gravitational field and will keep away from you?

Sorry but 37 lbs is heavy for any bike...especially one that goes for $1300! Especially if it isn't designed to run down mountains at 50 mph with 8" of front and rear travel. What did Breezer do, add lead to the down tube? There really isn't any reason I can see for that bike to be so portly. Nor is there any need for a bike to weigh that much. It doesn't gain you any durability.

I've got an old steel tandem at home that doesn't go 37 lbs. I've got a touring bike built to carry me and 50+ lb of gear that doesn't even tip the scales at 30 lb. That's ready to roll out the door...not stripped down. I've got a dual suspension all mountain mountain bike that doesn't tip the scales at 30 lbs.

Andy_K 

I consider it heavy for commuting.

canyoneagle

I wouldn't choose that bike for my commute - the bike is best suited for relatively flat city riding, with the capacity for some hills. I also think it is pretty ugly - a poor attempt at replicating a Dutch/English/Danish town bike.

For a bike of that purpose, I actually prefer a heavier duty (and heavier weight) machine, so the 35 pounds does no bother me.
For $1300 I'd rather get a Pashley, Works Opa, or the like. For anything more than a few miles I prefer a little more of a sporty ride - more aggressive position - either drop or flat bar with little sweep - 28 or 32c tires.
For rides longer than 20 miles each way, I'd opt for more of a conventional "sport touring" road bike (quasi CX bike, for example), though I'd stay with an IGH.

My present bike is probably 30-ish pounds without panniers (but with racks, fenders, lights, dynohub, IGH, Brooks, etc), and 40+ with panniers. It does not feel sluggish on the road. I do notice on the hills, but I'm geared for it and it does not bother me. I'm not timing myself.

Fizzaly

Sorry I can't afford the lighter parts, plus weight is relative as far as I'm concerned I'm not racing.

jeffpoulin

Me too. Way too heavy. Some of us have hills, and commutes that last longer than 10 minutes.

LesterOfPuppets

I'd have to draw the line at 30 lbs. without lights and water. Even that's pushing it, IMO.

Sure the Breezer has the gen. lights, but I don't think they're worth 7 lbs.

abracapocus

My commuter is 35 lbs. nekkid. It's at least 40 with stuff and maybe more depending on how much I'm carrying. My commute is about 18mi round trip. Yes, some hills. Makes me appreciate my road bike tons when I ride it. If the cash comes my way, I'll rig a lighter hauler, but it does the job. And it's pretty much bomb proof.

crhilton

I think they just see it as an opportunity to sell a different sort of gizmo. This bike comes with a CV hub and a generator hub. Which is why it looks like a $400 bike and costs $1269.

I agree though.

dwellman

That's some extra stuff to take into consideration adding to the total weight. So, I'd say it' pretty much average, right there.

cyccommute 

You both seem to be missing the point. I'm sure neither of you nor anyone else here paid $1300 for your 35 lb bikes. We aren't talking about a bike that is inexpensive with lots of steel parts to keep the cost down. It's an expensive bike that weighs way, way, way too much for no apparent reason.

I'm not running down your bikes nor the circumstances that require you to ride less expensive and heavier bikes. But this bike isn't being marketed towards you or your circumstances.

pallen

That bike wouldn't be my choice at all for many reasons, but I can see why Buy-cycling magazine would choose it for a commuter.

1. No deraileur + chainguard. You can ride in your nice clothes, in any weather. Low maintenance for daily use.
2. Racks for carrying your stuff to and from work. Most commuters are carrying stuff.
3. Dyno hub and lighting - no worries about batteries. Again, good for daily use.

Really, the only downside for a commuter is the weight. To me, that's a significant downside. For people who carry 40lbs of stuff everyday or only ride 3-4 miles it may not matter. I think the logic here is that commuters want low-maintenance and dont care about weight. I'm assuming the weight is all because of that funky drivetrain.

Pedaleur

No integrated lock.

(sorry, had to nit pick ;-)

FunkyStickman

I agree with you there... it's overpriced for what it is. Still, 35 pounds isn't a big deal to me, but for $1300 I would expect it to weigh a lot less, or have much nicer features.