Father and Son
 

Hello all,

A quick but important question... I am 118kg and my son in 22kg, so together we are around 140-145kg (or 320 pounds max). I have a decent but pretty standard Marin mountain bike, with hybrid wheels/tires.

So my Q is, will my bike (and wheels) safely support my son and I, as we ride around London? Not planning to go off-road!

Thank you!

Josh

If you're worried, why not get a trailer or cargo-style bike?

Good thinking... Just that most are e-bikes (don't want that), and/or very expensive...

I used a trailer when my daughter was little. If you are too much for the wheel it’s not going to fail catastrophically you’ll know it’s failing before you get hurt

That's reassuring - thank you.

How old is your son?

Do you have a seat already? What is it?

I don't like seeing little children on the bike with their parents. Even if they are in a special child seat. If they are in front of you then they'll just be a cushion for you in a wreck. If they are over the back tire, then their head might just be a watermelon being slammed to the ground.

I don't have any support for these conclusions other than my imagination. I do like it when I see people pulling their toddlers in a trailer attached to the bike.

Weight itself should not be an issue for the bike as long as you aren't riding like you are in a BMX race.

Over 30 years ago I took my kids around in a bike trailer; a long gone Cannondale Bugger. I was using a drop bar road bike with downtube friction shifters. Worked great.

I think Burly is still around, along with a lot of others. I used a rear mounted child’s seat for our daughter, but the trailer was a lot easier and, I felt, safer.

You are talking a considerable amount of weight to balance on two wheels. Not something I would want to do.

John

If you are planning to be riding the streets of a busy city, I don't think a trailer would be wise. I wouldn't be comfortable doing it anyway. If you do carry your son on a bike, be wary of them throwing their weight around. Kids have a tendency to do that and it could put you off balance.

Sorry, but I don't think uninformed speculation on what might happen is really useful here.

If the kid is in a decent seat with a good helmet, the kid's head is very unlikely to get "slammed". I did a lot of riding with seats and trailers when my kids were small. The main thing for me was keeping the speed reasonably slow and remember that turns are going to be different than a bike that has neither seat nor trailer.

Bike Trailer seems to be it. Especially considering you can modify it for touring next week when you and your kid go ridding together on your touring bikes. They get big fast fair warning. I never had to or got the chance to put training wheels on my kids bikes... Ha

Basing something on what we use to do back in the day seems almost just as much uninformed speculation too.

Use to not wear helmets while riding a bike till I was in my 50's. When young we use to ride with no seatbelts in cars. As a teen we'd strap in to a parachute and go para-sailing on land behind a car. Did all sorts of stuff we got away with. Doesn't mean it's entirely safe.

OP, how old is your son? At 22 kg he might be getting to an age where something like a Trail-a-Bike would be appropriate. He's not likely to get more than a summer's riding out of a trailer, I wouldn't think.

A hybrid with decent wheels should be able to support you and him (this summer) if he's too young to sit up by himself.

And don't worry about the kid with a helmet on. There are questions about helmet effectiveness, true, but the fall-over-to-the-side accident is what bike helmets are designed and tested to. Not that the boy would appreciate that kind of accident!

If you're going to claim it's dangerous, the burden of proof is on you. Statistically, my understanding is that the number of children injured in seats and trailers is too low for there to be any meaningful comparison of risk. In other words, it's really a competition between two safe methods of transporting children, not one where either is particularly dangerous.

The American Academy of Pediatrics prefers trailers but it doesn't look like that recommendation is really data driven.

You might want to start a thread asking people familiar with riding in London as to what method would be easier to use there, trailer vs. seat vs. trail-a-bike..

i had a nice little setup where the kid seat was mounted to the top bar of my MTB. it was such a great experience for my daughter when she was about 2 yrs old. and a great experience for me too seeing her look around and listening to her excitement as we rode around.

i never once found the configuration to be dangerous.

He's 5 and I have a Yepp seat (with seat belt) and a very sturdy rack.

Thanks - I think a trail-a-bike or cargo bike will be needed in the next year or so... He's 5yo now.

I moved my kids to the trailer when they were about 3. Have you ridden in London before? I'd think that some local knowledge would be helpful in making the choice. There's definitely cities where I wouldn't have considered trailers and ones where it wasn't a problem.

Emulate the London busses:
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...19809d64b3.jpg

Both a rack or top tube mounted child seat and a trailer have benefits and drawbacks in use and safety. From a simple perspective of falling though, one is clearly less dangerous than the other.

A child seat mounted on a rack or top tube has 3 feet to fall, the child is exposed to the ground, and there is a decent chance of the adult's weight striking the child in some manner.
A pull behind trailer puts the child on 2 wheels(more stable), has a pivot which increases the odds of the trailer staying upright when a bike falls, places material between the child and ground to reduce injury, and has a harness to help reduce impact with the ground.
https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...%20a%20trailer.


^ the above is a very realistic and hardly extreme analysis of safety when looking at only falling off the bike. Other types of accidents may mean different results- who knows. I only spoke of falling since that is what you initially took issue with in iride's post.



We had a Burley trailer for our youngest and used it for a very brief time because it was boring, Interaction was difficult with her in a bubble. Switched to a WeeHoo and suddenly family rides were faster, farther, and more fun because she was able to chat with us and be part of the ride.

Actually, no, my disagreement with him was in suggesting that the child's head would be slammed into the ground like a watermelon if such a fall occurred. There's pretty much no good data to support the notion that the bike seat/helmet combination isn't adequate protection from the consequences of such a fall. And, as you suggest, there may be other factors like the fact that the bike/trailer combination is a bigger target for car impact and perhaps harder to steer that may set off whatever marginal increase in hazard that height might entail.

Obviously, a child on the bike is higher than a child in a trailer, and therefore has further to fall. My contention is that we're really comparing two very safe ways to transport children, and I don't think there's any good reason for someone to get cringy when they see a parent using either method properly.

BTW, if you notice, neither the Consumer Reports or the AAP is suggesting bike seats are unreasonably dangerous, and both are offering standards for preferred features on the bike seats.

The WeeHoo looks like fun. Does it stay upright when you are fully stopped?

I still have my burley after almost 30 years. I still remember pulling my two kids in it giving me a real good leg workout going up hills. Nowadays, I use it just to wheel around big bulky items ( like relocating a skunk I caught in a live trap).

I had to google the WeeHoo, I don't think it was an option when my kids were small. Interesting. Based on your experience, is that something OP would likely enjoy using with a 5 yo in London?

I think my kids read kiddie books when they were in the trailer.

The Cannondale Bugger had our kids facing rearward so they had an unobstructed view which I think they liked.

The downside of that view may have been one of seeing cars rapidly approaching them.

I can’t say any of them were traumatized by the experience, but all of them were 18 when they got their driver’s licenses.

That cut down on expenses and any laws concerning under-18 drivers. So it was a win-win.

John