LaughingLots

The truth is that you have no experience with the leagues that you are commenting upon. On the other hand, I do have experience with those kids and those leagues and they do ride a great deal outside of the races and it instills a life long passion for riding in kids that would otherwise never have been exposed to bikes as more than a kid's toy. Those kids ride for fun, to school, to hang out at the local park, etc.

Again, your naive and clueless post was/is based upon no evidence:

"I don't think promoting organized bicycle racing in schools has any positive affect in encouraging this kind of practical and fun cycling."

You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts. Despite how much that may pain you.

p.s. "especially for the vast majority of non-participants" Way to try to move the goal posts. Funny, but very disingenuous.

Donsgirl1

Trying to purchase a BMX bike for my husband. However i don't know much about them. What's the better brand of BMX a Kawasaki or a Haro

jade408

You should start a separate thread.

ArmChairRider

bulldog1935

On a group ride today - we spin from Alamo Heights to the Alamodome and back - it's a social ride, 16 mi, but we always break into packs by pace.
Stevo and I came from Castle Hills, met the group and twisted back home through the Olmos Basin for a 28-mi ride (and a lot of climb).
Today in the group ride, Tad, petrl, set the pace on a 1934 Rollfast - 17-18 mph - he led the group the whole way.
Tad is an animal.
Tad took this photo - that's me on my 40-y-o Raleigh in the middle, and my buddy Stevo on his Dahon Tournado on the right

Rflee

You said it exactly. I was just listening to a mountain bike radio show called "the being dad show" and they were basically saying he same thing. Manufacturers are using these high end racers and these big epic backdrops with the a guy and an 8000$ bike to attract customers. They aren't trying to get the common consumer in the shop not at least they think their plan will bring in the common consumer. I do like the whole gravel bike concept. It brings a more rider friendly geometry to a road bike and can take various bags and things to do everyday things. Where are the adds with a family on a rails to trails on at least semi affordable bikes for the family. And believe it or not if they pushed recycling or making an old bike rideable again they would still gain sales because those same people would get into the sport and want a new bike. Another thing that hurts the sport are the bike snobs. And there are a lot in this sport. Who cares what someone rides or how much they ride. Just get on two wheels, should be the aim for all of us to push.

T Stew

Actually I run without those too.

I often run with only one piece of gear, a pair of running shorts (with built in liner, but usually some athletic unders and then any old pair of shorts) anything less would be illegal in most places.

Rollfast

U-locks stink.


1. They are prone to rust from snow and ice.
2. One joker left mine on the undamaged wooden step railing of my trailer
3. What got it back was him bragging to a bunch of kids about the bike he was going to chop into a lowrider and he didn't count on them telling the LBS owner who immediately recognized it was a 1995 Schwinn Classic Cruiser, that only two were in town and his predecessor sold both.


Summary: I don't care what you use short of silliness, they want it, they take it.


That being said, a Bell combination from the dept. store is as good as anything HERE.


Maybe you live in the wrong gulag, and that's no fun.


You do too much researching. I get stuff and go.


I RAT a LITTLE too do whatever looks and functions the best may go together. Of course I do ride a '95 Schwinn Cruiser SS with painted and custom striped peaked fenders, a late 50s Rollfast middleweight with Comubmia tank and split reflector Repros and custom welded utility rack and a custom paintjob I designed, and an early 60s lightweight Rollfast with a tank and older J. C. Higgins (40s?) rack that has lenses built in for lights.


The one thing I do tell grown men around here is that you really can't ride a little BMX with your knees at chest level, you are not a Shriner.

bulldog1935

unless you have the funny hat

Rollfast

That funny hat is earned by having a big heart.


and God bless Danny Thomas

CompleteStreets

OP here, finally back to support my original post.

Despite appearances, I'm not out to eliminate choice and turn the world into a Soviet nation. I'm all for having a variety of bikes: road bikes, hybrid, mountain, folding, city bikes, etc.

I do feel that the bike industry as a whole could make some positive steps to simplify things for consumers while still giving them choices. Classic example: many bikes are ill-designed to accept fenders and/or racks. A friend of mine (very experienced with bikes) said that when he worked at a college bike shop, the two most annoying requests he constantly got from students were to add fenders and racks to their bikes. Why were these installs annoying? Because a huge portion of the bikes on the market are not well designed to be fitted with fenders and racks. Many bikes don't have any eyelets, or only have one set of eyelets instead of two. It doesn't matter whether the bike is a city bike, hybrid, mountain, or road bike ... Would it not be helpful to consumers, and give them more ability to customize their bikes to their liking (i.e. have choice), if bike manufacturers could increase the percentage of bikes that come with eyelets?

Moreover, many road bikes don't have enough clearance near the brakes to even fit fenders. I see bikes all over the place that had to have a portion of the fender cut off, and a special bracket added on just to make the fender work. How is that good for consumer choice??? I'm not saying we need to standardize the hell out of ALL bikes, but there has got to be a way to give the industry as a whole a little nudge so that consumers don't face obstacles if all they want is to add a front basket for carrying their purse or groceries, or add on fenders.

Also (and perhaps the bike industry is improving on this front already), I see room for improvement on standardizing certain things. For example, 1.25" tires are *sometimes* not the same as 1 1/4" tires. Excuse me? Yep, they're off by a couple millimeters or some such thing. And there are quite a ton of microscopic variations in the width of rim flanges. That creates a dilemma for low-income people who show up at a co-op looking for a used wheel or tire. Even if the infinite number of rim and tire variations remain, what if roughly 50% of bikes fell into a less hectic, somewhat standardized sizing system? Yes, road bikes would still require narrow rims for 25mm tires, vs. 2.05" mountain bike tires, but there has to be room to improve in making things a little more standardized, for the consumer's sake.

Regarding bike lights, perhaps my biggest gripe is that several of my friends and I have had our lights stolen, often because we forgot to remove them for a quick errand. I'm sorry, but if a person is trip chaining (biking to school, then to work, then to grab dinner, then stopping at a grocery store, then going home) it is absolutely ridiculous for most light systems to be easily stolen by thieves. It is beyond annoying to have to put the lights on five times, and take them off five additional times, for simple every day transportation. Imagine if we had to remember to do that for car lights.

Firstly, we need to promote generator lights, with many more bikes being stocked with them. For those who stick with battery or USB lights, why not have them removable only with a key? Snap them on with no effort. Leave them on for the whole day, or several days until they need to be recharged, and not have to worry about theft. Spend five seconds once a week or so to use a key to unlock the lights from the bike. Bam. Problem solved. OK, so it costs an extra $5 to manufacture a locking mechanism, but if that means consumers are saved from the hassle of putting on/removing their lights 1,000+ times every single year, I think it's worth it.

Regarding pant legs being shredded by exposed sprockets, why don't more bikes come stock with bash guards? Hellllooooo. For people using bicycles for transportation, having grease marks and shredded pants is not desirable, yet it happens all the time.

I don't know how we get there, but there has to be a happy medium between what exists today and Soviet style standardization. All I'm asking for is for the needle to be shifted a little to make things easier on consumers. End rant. Now attack me, haha.

indyfabz

Wonder if anyone still cares.

jefnvk

Ikea has you covered: SLADDA Bicycle - IKEA

After the CAD exchange rate (doesn't look like it has made it to the US yet), it's even a reasonable price of $450.

Gresp15C

I suspect that we're quickly moving towards that system. I've read that sales of new bikes are roughly 25% mountain bikes, and 25% hybrids. Given the trend towards 29ers on the MTB side, and MTB style parts on hybrids, we're converging on a fairly standardized system of parts for 50% of bikes.

Of course you can't make all of the past standards go away.

Maelochs

No, it wouldn’t, necessarily.

The issue here is that there is more to adding eyelets than adding eyelets.

If eyelets are added, people might add fenders ... or might add racks. Since the owners might add racks, the designers have to design the support structures sufficiently strong that they can take the possible loads ... which includes the lateral loads as the rack sways side to side and torques the eyelets and the chain- and seat stays.

Since many people who ride do Not plan to put racks on their bikes, they don’t want their bikes to be designed to be bulkier and heavier to accommodate the extra potential load.

On the other hand,, there are a lot of bikes out there designed to accept racks. People who want to can buy those bikes and add racks, or fenders, or baskets.

Also, there are ways to mount fenders without eyelets (SKS Race Blades come to mind.)

That pretty much makes that whole topic ridiculous.

People who want bikes that can take the loads of racks can simply buy those bikes. One doesn't need to do a lot of research or have any specialized knowledge to see if a frame has eyelets and rack mounts.

What is a good consumer choice is to choose the bike that fits the consumer’s needs. If people choose to buy bikes which do not meet their needs, they are simply not smart consumers.

You are choosing one subset of consumers---those which want fenders and racks---and deciding that All bike customers should have to cater to their needs. How about this: Be Smart Enough to Buy a Bike Which Does What the Customer Wants.

There are plenty of bikes that accept wide tires, fenders, racks, and all the rest. I know because I own some of them. There are also bikes which have limited tire clearance and no rack or fender mounts. I know, because I own some of them.

Sorry if the people you interviewed made bad choices.

This is an invented issue. There are plenty off bikes that accept wide tires, fenders, racks ... and baskets and bags can be mounted to Any bike. (Again, I know this because I have done this.)

You are looking at the complaints of consumers who made bad choices and try trying to force their preferences on everyone else. Instead, advise those people to actually meet their own needs ... and let the rest of us determine Our own needs.

Again, you try to punish others for your own foolish behavior.

I have removable lights on all my bikes. When I go shopping I remove them---they are easily removable. This means they can be stolen easily, but it also means they can be prevented from being stolen easily ... by not forgetting them. if you and your friends screwed up, so sorry. Don’t expect an entire industry to adapt to your inability to take care of your own possessions.

Or ... if you think there is a market for it, design and market your own permanently-mounted light. Problem solved ... without asking the whole rest of the world to conform to your specific needs or desires, or to compensate for your inabilities.

WRONG. I do not want generator lights. They do not produce a steady beam. if I am going slowly they do not provide light .. which means if I am at an intersection I am invisible and thus in a very dangerous situation.

If YOU want to promote generator lights, go ahead. I prefer my lightweight, convenient, portable, readily removable rechargeable lights. I have been using them without issue for decades. it wasn’t hard to learn.

because then I have to carry another key, can lose a key, and also, the entire mount would have to be extremely strong---and thus heavy---or a lock would be superfluous.

Why not just learn to take your lights with you? Why try to change the world, when it would be much easier for you to not make simple mistakes. And ... if you really think there is a big market for lock-on headlights ... go for it.

Maybe the reason there aren’t any on the market ... is that only a very few people want them, because most people find it easy and convenient to have readily removable rechargeable lights?

Because most people don’t have this problem? Because why add more parts to a bike when it is easier to simply not have a problem? I commuted daily for years. When I had to wear long pants, I tied them off with a bandana. Eventually I made a velcro band which was easier to use. There are already numerous solutions.

What you keep asking for here is for the industry to change how it does business based on issues which most cyclists have already solved, and for which there are already plenty of products. There are generator lights. There are lights which bolt onto bike. There are trouser-leg restraints. There are bikes which accept wide tires and fenders. There are bags, racks, and baskets which can be attached to any bike.

The industry is already easy enough for consumers to navigate ... if those consumers are reasonably intelligent. The industry cannot help you if you forget to remove your lights any more than it can compensate if you forget to lock your bike, or forget to pump up your tires, or forget to maintain your bike, or fail to adjust the brake or shifters.

Seems to me that if you make a very few changes to Yourself, and avail yourself of the choices which are already out there you won’t have to demand that the rest of the world change to make your errors less painful or your personal preferences easier to access.

PaulRivers

Well it certainly looks like the post above this one took you up on your offer to have someone attack you, lol. I'm not going to get into that as it seems like a waste of effort.

I would note that I went shopping this year and some bike manufacturers do agree with you. If you buy a Specialized or Trek flat bar road bike (so the Sirrus or Trek Fx), they include several of the things you mentioned - a specific mounting point built into the frame for a kickstand, it includes a mounting point for fenders, and a rack. They also have the clearance for fenders and somewhat fatter tires...though much to irritation, they made the clearance for 35c, but not 38c tires, so I cannot buy one to use for winter biking with 45nrth Gravdal's. A 38c just barely fits on the frame and is very close to rubbing.

I bought a full carbon specialized sirrus, and it came with less points for accessories built in, but it had "enough". The rear triangle had a mount point for a rack built into it. No upper mount point, but you could replace the seatpost collar and get the same thing (source: that's what I did). The inside of the rear stay had a mount point build into it for a fender, since it came with disc brakes this was necessary. I unfortunately didn't see a kickstand mount point (though...hmm...maybe I should check again). The aluminum version had one. I think it came with a bash guard to though I'm not 100% sure.

I didn't have a chance to look at their aluminum road bikes, so I don't know if you can find similar things there or not. But they did put them on their straight bar skinnier tire road bikes.

The biggest issue with batter lights is that what's needed to make them chargeable also makes them stealable. You have to remove your light from the bike to charge it. Dynamo light costs would have to come way, way down in order to make it feasible to include them by default. I do see bikes at the bike shop that come with fenders, racks, dynamo lights - they never seem to sell well though. I personally don't want to buy them because they always seem to make them ugly looking and not come with things I want - like a full carbon fork.

Go to a bike shop and look at a Specialized Sirrus or Trek Fx, and I think you'll find that bike manufacturers have put some effort into doing what you're talking about though.

bbbean 

I'm not sure you are. Bike applications are varied enough that there are very good reasons for the specializations you see.

The beginning cyclist you seek to protect has plenty of options available to him. It really doesn't take that much research to buy an entry level road bike or mtb, or a hybrid if you just can't make up your mind. You can walk into the vast majority of LBSs with $500 or less and walk out with a find entry level bike in less than an hour. The fact that there are more options or that it takes research to get a high performing bike, or that you may have to look around if you have a more specialized application (i.e.cargo bike, fat tire bike, TT bike, etc.) doesn't reflect a shortcoming in the industry. It merely reflects reality. The same is true in virtually any other sport/hobby/endeavor.

BB

memebag

Summary: I like a certain kind of bike and don't think bike shops sell enough of them.

Response: Bike shops will sell whatever people want to buy. There is no anti-fender, pro-removable light cabal influencing the market. My first bike was a single speed cruiser. My third bike was a city hybrid with rack, panniers and fenders. My second and fourth bikes were road bikes ill suited to commuting or grocery shopping, but well suited to riding long distances at high speed in a group.

I have no trouble removing my lights when I stop my bike. I don't want hub dynos. I like fenders on my hybrid, but I would hate them on my road bikes. If you look around and everyone else is buying something you don't want, you might be in a minority. It's OK to be in a minority. Learn to live with it. The world isn't built for you.

bbbean 

What he said.

DaveQ24

I think you're overthinking the whole thing. Like so many already said, directly or implicitly, go to the LBS, say "I want to do this" and "this is my proposed budget" and "hook me up".

I used to cross country ski in my teens through college, then got out of it for almost 30 years. A few years ago I decided I was NOT getting stuck indoors during another long cold northern winter. So, I went to a good LSS (local ski shop" and said "this is what I want to do" ... "I think I would like to spend about $$$ doing it to start with" and "can you hook me up?"

The only "research" of any real significance I did was some on-line reading, a few hours worth, over that Thanksgiving holiday weekend - it is so EASY to learn about things online, there are everything from basic primers about any sport/hobby/interest to the specialty sites that delve into the minutiae.

So, LSS guy spent a little time with me, talked about what I wanted to do ... backcountry/touring/rough terrain, showed me some options in brands, equipment, etc and ... hooked me up. Happy to do it, pretty sure he worked on commission.

Went from "I think I want to do this" on Thanksgiving morning to having everything in my car Sunday afternoon ... then it snowed the next weekend.

kirkplan

nice vintage bike