Originally Posted by
coominya
That wider tires and a less twitchy steering is a safer ride for suburban and highway environments.
Really? I suppose the alternative would be .. LEARNING TO RIDE A BIKE.
Same for this one:
Originally Posted by
coominya
I have ridden a racer and I know what it feel like when the front locks up on a dry downhill, I have never had that happen on a bike with wide tires.
I have been riding for 50 years. I have ridden everything from tricycles to tandems, MTBs rigid to full-suspension, and all variety of road bikes. If you really want to claim that you can lock a tire at 40 mph on a road bike but not on an MTB (with generally canti-, V-, or disc brakes) then you live in an alternate universe with different physics ... in this world, your Back brake is going to lock first in hard braking on a downhill.
Learn to ride before telling other people what to ride, maybe?
As with frame material debates, all we are really discussing is preference and prejudice.
Wide tires do not make a bike more stable---one can crash on Any bike. An upright riding position confers no specific comfort or safety advantage. An "MTB" frame is just a frame; true many "MTB" frames have slacker geometry than some road frames, but if the difference of a few degrees in head-tube angle makes a bike unrideable for a specific rider, that is the rider, not the bike.
I say again: I have done a lot of commuting on a flatbar and drop bar bikes, with "MTB" frames and "road" frames, and some on a full-suspension MTB.
THEY ALL WORK. And except for the F/S (which was too far out of its element to convey its specific benefits) They all work about as well.
All the rest is preference and prejudice. Some of it is eloquently defended, but eloquence does not change facts.