FamilyMan007

Sorry if I am being unduly sensitive, but I am not sure how what I wrote deserved to trigger the above response.

To refresh, my final comment was "Thought = will 'flat-bar-road-bikes' become such a significant feature that they deserve their own separate forum as they seem to have as much in common with road bikes as with 'traditional' hybrids (however one would define that term)?'

That thought (which followed a relatively harmless comment encouraging someone to think about the type of riding one was likely to do, and then to buy a bike which puts a smile on ones face) was in response to my review of the CAAD8 link where I noticed that the frame was identical to the road bike version.

It seems, badger1, that you are understandably upset by the treatment which 'flat-bars' received at the road-bike forum.

You seem to have interpreted my comment as a 'reverse snobbery' to push you out of this forum. However, I would appreciate if you re-read my post and try to interpret it in a different light:
~ My reference to 'they' was to a type a bike which apart from flat handlebars is identical to road bikes;
~ My comment 'will .. become' is future oriented, not a suggestion that any action is called for immediately;
~ My comment 'deserve' was meant in a reward rather than a punishment context -- after all there are a lot of separate forums so why not consider one dedicated to flat-bar 'road' bikes IF that is where the market goes?

As a practical matter, my post also acknowledged the challenge of definition. It certainly does not worry me if there is no such end result. However, in my day in business one tried not to call ideas 'silly', rather build on them to come get to a better solution.

Perhaps it is time I spent less time on this forum and more time putting a smile on my face. It is a lovely day and I am going for a ride.

Enjoy.

badger1

Oh dear, FM007 ... you've got the wrong end of the stick there! My reflections in that post were indeed prompted by issues raised in yours, but just to be clear I was not at all suggesting that you were proposing some sort of definition of 'hybrid' that would be exclusionary, and I certainly was not suggesting you/your post as an example of the 'reverse snobbery' I was referring to. It was not an example of that. Apologies if you read my musings that way.

I was referring to many, many posts on this board (in many threads) that suggest directly or indirectly that there is a specifiable set of defining characteristics for 'hybrid' bicycles and those who ride them, and that bicycles (and indeed cyclists!) who deviate from the paradigm so constructed are somehow not to be recognized as riding 'hybrids'. In other words, there is a kind of 'reverse snobbery' on this board at times that is just as off-putting as the 'roadie snobbery' allegedly found on the 41. If you hang around here long enough, you'll see pretty clearly what I mean!

yashinon

What is the retail on this bike? Looks nice!

Grey.

I still don't get why a "specifiable set of defining characteristics" is a bad thing.

The CAAD8 has the exact same frame (and Sora drivetrain) as the road bike version, it is literally the same bike with flat bars. Is your implication that any bike with flar bars is a Hybrid?

NormanF

They're called performance hybrids. Some people just want a fast bike with flat bars.

badger1

Re. your first point, don't know what more to say. As I said to FMOO7, if you hang around here long enough you'll see what I mean (or not; not a big deal).

To answer your second point: no, that is not what I am suggesting.

themishmosh

HYBRID is a broad range of different bikes. I would say that even drop bar cyclocross bikes can be considered hybrids. They run the range from comfort bike to mountain bike to road bike.

Yes, a road bike with flat handlebar, flat bar shifters, flat bar brake levers is a hybrid.

I see in another post that you recently bought a Trek 7.3. If you want to be a hybrid snob, you might call that a light-duty, non-suspension mountain bike with skinny tires. "What makes the 7.3 a hybrid?"

DaveTMpls

It's not just slightly more upright, depending on how you've set up your stem angle. If you have drop bars, your back is parallel to the ground, and to look forward you really have to be able to bend your head back. IMO this is fine when there's no one in front of you. In the city, there is ALWAYS someone in front of you, or walking in the path next to yours, or .... You have to have your head on a swivel, and it's easier with a flat bar, which makes it easier to keep your head up.

Plus, I have calcified ligaments in my neck, which means I really can't bend my head back as far as I could as a young man.

Copper_head

Looks good. Very similar specs to my Fuji Absolute 1.3

I wanted a flat bar road bike because I did not feel comfortable on the hoods. Having pressure on the heel of my hand caused pain in my surgically repaired left wrist and twice broken right wrist. I found the shifters to be ridiculously clumsy as well. I rode a few different bike before deciding on a flat bar. I shopped a lot before buying the Fuji. The stand over is fine. I bought a shorter stem because the 110 that came on it seemed to be making me reach too far and creep forward on the saddle. I put bar ends on it to give me an alternative hand position. Ends up being very similar to the hoods position but does not put any weight on the heels of my hands.

Grey.

edit: I had a longer response typed here but in the interest of halting this debate, i've removed it. I will say that the difference between me and bager, is I don't mind someone calling my bike a mountain bike with skinny tires. Calling this a road bike, (which it so obviously is, in my opinion) is apparently crossing some kind of line.

FamilyMan007

I hesitate to wade into this again, especially as this conversation is likely hijacking the intent if the OP. However, here goes:

Perhaps the issue is not the definition of a 'hybrid' - it is really the intent of the rider. Specifically I could envisage the following forums evolving over time:
~ Mountain
~ Road Bikes (ie 'drop handlebars')
~ High-Performance-Flat-Bars (HPFB) - new
~ Hybrid (ie everything else, except those addressed by the numerous 'specialty' forums for other interests (50+, family, etc, etc).

Let me emphasize that the possible new HPFB forum is being suggested for consideration as a 'reward' for such riders, NOT a 'punishment' - the objective would be to enable riders with such interest to have a dedicated forum catering to their very specific issues (not cluttered up with the very different issues of more general riders).

For myself, I ride a Cannondale Quick SL-1 with a relatively complete 105 groupset. Some people could describe this as a HPFB - but I would align myself with a 'Hybrid' group, partly as my current usage on its 1.25" wide tyres is primarily focused on bike paths and I am more interested in enjoying the scenery while I exercise rather than worrying that my average speed is less than 24kmph (15mph) and my max speed (downhill) has never exceeded 52kmph (33mph).

Over time it is possible that my interests will change - perhaps then I would feel myself aligned with a potential HPFB forum (even without changing my bike).

Most forums seem to manage without the need to 'define' membership according to characteristics of the bike - I feel the above idea is consistent.

It may be that no-one else agrees with me - no problem it is just an idea. But can we try to discuss/critique in a constructive tone? In the end I can live with any outcome including the status quo. If those interested in what I am designating as 'HPFB' start dominating the Hybrid forum I can always accept or consider whether 'recreational' or '50+' forums are more aligned with my interests.

Hoping that the current thunderstorm will have moved on by tomorrow so I can go for another ride and put another smile on my face

EDIT started this before I saw Grey's latest post - perhaps I am out or order - apologies.

Grey.

I think you have a very reasonable point of view, and I don't think you're out of order. My edit was to remove myself from a debate I helped start.

intransit1217

I have found the main difference to be reach. The flat bar goes through the stem and with usually little pullback is relatively the same.

On a road bike, the cross bar bends 90 degrees forward at a point, then adds 3-4 inches of reach by adding brake hoods.

After comparing riding position of my 8.4 ds to my specialized secteur, there's no way I will ever be as comfy on my road bike. Unless I do something radical and stupid like reverse the stem. I'm not sure that would fix it any way.

RollCNY

[MENTION=41910]badger1[/MENTION], I think your distinction between a "true flat bar road bike" and a "drop bar bike with flat bars" is probably too subtle for anyone to actually design. The reason I say that is that human morphology varies too much for one set of designs with a few static sizes to cover all options. I think the people that seek to ride performance flat bar bikes look specifically for a frame that accomplishes your goals specific to their individual geometry. I can say that personally, I do not try to replicate the hoods for a flat bar build, but something halfway between hoods and drops.

To me, the key distinguishing features of a true "flat bar road bike" versus a "hybrid" is chain stay length, bottom bracket stiffness, and handling. The difference between a "flat bar road bike" and a "drop bar bike with flats" is how well the builder selected a frame. Certain road frames are long and low, others are short and tall. As an example, I could make an excellent flat bar road bike for my personal geometry out of a BMC SL01 or 02 frame.

And [MENTION=126145]meanwhile[/MENTION], if you think saddle to bar drop translates directly to weight on your hands, you might want to reread your fitting material, and probably pedal harder.

meanwhile

Pedal forces can't lessen weight on the hands: draw a vector diagram of the forces. If you have seen a fit manual that says otherwise, then please provide a link because someone should do something about it.

Otoh, if you are just going to bs and can't provide a link, then I shall simply make fun of your use of the "My imaginary friend says.." argument.

meanwhile

..You might want to get your imaginary friend to look at the results of this google search:

https://www.google.com/search?client...oe=utf-8&gl=uk

...Because EVERY link I checked - all to respected frame makers, bike fitter and publications, says that moving the stem lower and further forward (which is what you do to be more aero) increases weight on your hands!

Even allowing for the fact that there are lots of fit manuals and they won't all have been written by super competent people, I will be shocked if anyone was stupid to write what you claim. (My money is on you having invented a psuedo source to back you up, which you won't be able to show. But, hey, it might just be that you didn't understand what you read!)

The closest that any sane competent person has every come to matching your silly claim is

https://sheldonbrown.com/upgrade.htmlNewer bikes, particularly the larger sizes, tend to have considerably longer top tubes than older ones. This is good for racers, bad for most everybody else. A racer likes a very stretched-out upper body position, with the back nearly horizontal. This is, in fact faster. If your legs are strong enough to keep pedaling hard all the time, the reaction to the pedaling force will allow you to maintain this position without undue strain to your upper body...but: If you're heavier than a typical racer, and don't pedal as hard all the time, an aggressive upper body position will lead to resting too much weight on your hands. This can lead to serious problems with your wrists, shoulders, neck.

..Which is a very narrow get out clause that applies to aggressive bikes used at sports performance levels by highly athletic riders. So realistically, no one on a hybrid except back when Lance The Liar was trying to sell the model with his name on..

RollCNY

How much weight you have on the pedals impacts how much weight you have on your butt and hands. The sum of forces on all three points is the same total, therefore putting more weight on your feet always decreases the weight on your bars and saddle.

As to the triangle you mention, moving the bars lower and forward may or may not move weight forward, depending on what your torso and CG do. My arms pivot at my shoulders, and bend at the elbows, so many changes can be made for comfort with minor CG changes.

But in general, even flattening out with an intention to move your CG forward is bout getting it over the pedals. Many fit systems hinge on finding a fore aft position that let's you hold your preferred back angle without holding your handlebars.

RollCNY

You might want to actually read the Steve Hogg article that was your third link. I don't think it means what you think it means.

meanwhile

Yes and no. Because it is actual torque - ie force times lever arm distance - that counts.

And at commuting burn, pedal force is very small compared to your weight - it it wasn't, then you'd have to exert serious upper body force to stabilize yourself. Because only one leg goes down at a time, yes??? If you look at cyclists who are in this mode of pedaling - track bike racers, TDF racers in a finishing sprint, MTBers in a standing climb - you'll see that they're seriously straining their upper bodies:




..The pedaling forces you guys generate while commuting are, I am afraid, trivial by comparison. You are not athletes, let alone supermen who perform at elite atheltic sprint levels during an entire commute.

meanwhile

And really, people, learn to use common sense. If you your pedal thrust was generating a substantial amount of your own body weight in oridnary pedaling, then you'd be squirming from one side of the seat to another - and your knees would blow in a year of commuting! Pedaling at this sort of force level is something even athletic riders do only in sprints, requires a lot of stablization effort, and a different position to get safe knee alignment (it's why SS and fixie riders run special bars and climb standing.)

badger1

[QUOTE=RollCNY;17105238][MENTION=41910]badger1[/MENTION], I think your distinction between a "true flat bar road bike" and a "drop bar bike with flat bars" is probably too subtle for anyone to actually design. The reason I say that is that human morphology varies too much for one set of designs with a few static sizes to cover all options. I think the people that seek to ride performance flat bar bikes look specifically for a frame that accomplishes your goals specific to their individual geometry. I can say that personally, I do not try to replicate the hoods for a flat bar build, but something halfway between hoods and drops.

To me, the key distinguishing features of a true "flat bar road bike" versus a "hybrid" is chain stay length, bottom bracket stiffness, and handling. The difference between a "flat bar road bike" and a "drop bar bike with flats" is how well the builder selected a frame. Certain road frames are long and low, others are short and tall. As an example, I could make an excellent flat bar road bike for my personal geometry out of a BMC SL01 or 02 frame.

And [MENTION=126145]meanwhile[/MENTION], if you think saddle to bar drop translates directly to weight on your hands, you might want to reread your fitting material, and probably pedal harder.[/QUOTE/]

Hi RollNYC,

Good to see you back here! I agree with you ... I was perhaps guilty of elaborating my preferences into a paradigm (the very thing I was criticizing elsewhere!!). My first post in this thread should have been more nuanced. There's no question that bikes like a CAAD8 (or 10, for that matter) converted to flat bars will work very well for some, perhaps many, people who want a flat-bar road bike. The same is true for current production models like the Trek 7.7FX or the 2013-14 carbon Sirrus. They just don't work optimally for me, given (as you say) my "individual geometry", physical limitations, and desired position on the bike. It just happens that bikes designed in the manner that the new ('15) carbon Sirrus is suit me perfectly.

meanwhile

...And the ones who don't understand how bicycles work think that a road bike frame with flat bars is one. Which is understandable, but completely incorrect - it's bike that has crippled rolling resistance and handling and can no longer take advantage of the opportunities that provides for reduced air resistance. But these bikes are bought by the most ignorant cycle buyers and they're an easy sell to that group.

side_FX

So....how about that CAA8 Flat Bar? Looks nice, it's nice to have options since everyone's thought of what makes a good hybrid is

RollCNY

Hey Badger, it's nice to be remembered. I share your pet peeve with the road forum diatribes on flat bars, and I think I tilt at the same windmills. I still keep on eye out here, but mainly ride a single speed drop bar bike long distances. So I get to be a pariah in every sub-forum. . But I agree with you on how nice a performance flat bar bike can be.

2702

Meanwhile is a bit of a bicycle snob. Nothing wrong with any bicycle out there. If you like it and it fits good go for it. According to him I am a ignorant rider with a road bike that has flat bars that cannot be enjoyed cause its crippled.