Printable View
I am brand new to riding. So new that I don't own a bike yet, but I want one really bad and was told that this was a great place to get some info
I am 27 y/o, 5'5", 125 lbs, and haven't been on a bike since I was a kid. My town has a great specialty bike store that I plan on visiting very soon. What are the types of bikes (mountain, etc) and what are the price ranges? Thanks so much! I can't wait to get started!
Hi Rudyb,
Wow, that's a hard question!
There are many, many types of bikes, from racy bikes at $5K and up, to used commuters for free at freecycle places, and everything in between. But unless you're looking pretty high end, you can probably find something that will work for a few hundred dollars or less for a basic bike.
What sort of riding are you looking forward to doing?
Where will you be biking? (Pave trails, streets, gravel roads, mountain-bike trails)
Bikes, like cars, are designed for pretty specific purposes and conditions, though, like cars, you can often use a bike for more than it's basic purposes. So if you're commuting on roads, you probably want a bike that's fairly comfortable, has fenders, side bags, and so forth. That same commuter will work great for going on picnics, getting some exercise, and so forth. But it won't work so well for a rough trail.
So what are your bike dreams?
Hi Rudyb!
Congratulations on deciding to bike again! I am sure you will be hopelessly addicted in no time.
I actually think that you will find that your bike shop will be able to answer the broad questions you've asked very well. I would advise you to go visit them as soon as possible, and then come back with more specific questions. Types of bikes? Road, Hybrid, Cyclocross, Touring, a couple different flavors of mountain bike, etc; price ranges? hmm, $200 - $10,000 -- and so on -- having someone to answer your questions in person, and having the chance to see what they're talking about, will be much more helpful at this stage than the advice others can give online. Once you have a narrower idea of what you are looking for, or have one or two options you are deciding between for specific reasons, come back and you will get more information than you ever wanted :D...
Good luck!
edit: I didn't make this clear, don't expect to walk out the shop with a bike on your first visit -- you are there to learn and get a better idea of what you want. Once you've narrowed it down to one or two categories, you should ride a bunch of bikes and decide what feels best to you (because different bikes will feel very different). If possible, you should visit more than one shop before deciding on a bike.
Hmm...
What sort of riding do you plan on doing? What type of terrain? Because there are TONS of different types of bikes...too many for me to even list off the top of my head! And the prices ranges are like a $150 to like $8000 (or more if you really want).
I am also very new to cycling, but it sounds like we have the same build, so I thought I would pass on one piece of advice that was very helpful to me when looking for my bike. I was looking at a lot of women's specific designed bikes. I assumed they would be more comfortable for me, until I went to a bike shop, they took my measurements, and it turned out that my inseam to torso ratio meant that wsd bikes would not fit me properly. So whatever you get, make sure you get fitted properly!
Cervelo has an interesting take on women's specific designs. They say it's all marketing garbage. I tend to believe Cervelo. Smart guys. Smart bikes. The only major bike manufacturers with more engineers than marketers on their staff.Quote:
Originally Posted by 3for3
Women-specific geometry
Why don't you offer any women-specific geometry?
Answer - Women-specific geometry
Fit and proper geometry are just as important for women and they are for men, but unfortunately women-specific geometry does a disservice to this need and is a bit of a marketing gimmick. Especially when you look at exactly what they changed compared to the standard bikes, one can only frown. In short, neither the concept of women-specific design nor the execution makes sense. Consider the following:
1) Most importantly, there is no difference in body dimensions between men and women. If you look at a 5'1 man and a 5'1 woman, the average body dimensions are identical. Since women are shorter on average than men it appears to be a gender issue, but it really isn't, it's a short-person issue. So the trick is not to design women-specific geometry, but to make sure the geometry makes sense for shorter people. We do that, and every bike company should do that - one has to make sure that not only the geometry for a 56 or 58cm frame is properly designed, but also the 51cm and the 48cm.
2) It is true that most small frames don't fit women properly, but they also don't fit men properly (which is no surprise when you consider issue #1). The problem is that the smaller frames don't really get that much smaller with most manufacturers, both because they don't know how to handle issues like toe overlap and because they don't really understand the correlation between effective toptube length and seattube angle (as unbelievable as it sounds that bike companies sometimes don't understand bike geometry, it's really true).
3) Most women-specific geometry have shorter toptubes but also steeper seattubes. The shorter toptube gets the headtube closer to the rider, but the steeper seattube pushes the headtube forward again. Net result: nothing
4) The real trick is to look at the cockpit length, or more specifically the horizontal distance from the bottom bracket to the headtube (see the diagram). When you set up a bike, you will put the saddle a certain horizontal distance behind the bottom bracket. This is irrespective of the exact seattube angle of the frame, you will simply move the saddle fore and aft on the rails until the saddle is the correct distance behind the bottom bracket. How far away the handlebars are is dependent on how far the saddle is behind the bb and how far the headtube is in front of the bb. Since you won't change the saddle position, you only need to consider the bb-headtube dimension, the horizontal dimension on the diagram. You can see on the diagram that if a manufacturer shortens the toptube but at the same time steepens the seattube enough, the headtube won't come any closer. This problem is not only existent on women-specific designs, most small frames from manufacturers barely get shorter horizontal dimensions. so if the 51cm frame from these manufacturers is too big, so will the 48cm be.
5) On our road bikes, we design by horizontal dimension, so the 48cm frame is shorter than the 51cm frame, just as it should. So if the 51cm is too long, the 48cm will likely fit. Just to give you an idea, our 48cm frame has a shorter horizontal dimension than most women-specific 43 and 45cm frames around.
6) As a sidenote, some women-specific parts do make sense. There is of course the women-specific saddle, which can be a real problem-solver for some (although there are also plenty of women who prefer "mens" saddles). For people with smaller hands (women or men) the special handlebars and STI levers that put the levers closer to the bars also can provide an advantage.
Just gotta say I totally disagree with the quoted Cervelo article....based on my own experience.
I do agree that if you are merely talking about a bike manufacturer just painting a step-through bike pink and putting a puffy foam "comfort" saddle on it and a cute basket and calling it "women specific" then that doesn't mean a heck of a lot.
To RudyB- you'll be narrowing down what kind of bike you need based on what USE you are planning to get from your bike, and also on the kind of terrain you'll be riding on. Without having any idea of what kind of riding you are hoping/planning to do, no one can really make any relevant suggestions- there are just so many different kinds of bikes out there made for so many uses. ;)
wow, yeah really! Men and women ARE built differently!Quote:
Originally Posted by celerystalksme
even if they are the same height, women tend to be longer legged and shorter in the torso.
That's why so many women end up miserable OR on custom bikes.
BSG -- I would be interested in hearing why you disagree with the article in more specific terms. I'm not challenging you, I am personally interested and I think it would be potentially useful to others.
Personally, I recently bought a WSD bike, but it is a "pink and shrink" design. It's a Scott Contessa CR1 Pro, which is exactly the same frame geometry as the men's CR1, just with a different paint job. It does have WSD components (came with short reach levers, which I kept, as well as a tiny stem, compact crank, short crank arms, and a women's saddle, all of which I ditched). I *did* go from a medium frame (54) to an XS frame (compact geometry, labeled a 49). I'm not all that short (for a woman, anyway -- 5'6"), but with a 120 stem, this bike feels amazing. It's very comfortable, I'm reasonably aero, it's super quick... So my situation actually somewhat supports the Cervelo article, but then, I think it's really hard to generalize about bike fit because everyone's anatomy, fitness, flexibility, etc are so different...
I think it's an interesting discussion.
Sorry if I just hijacked :o.
I plan on riding on the street mostly and for FITNESS! I'm ready do do something other than running. I can't wait to get started and I really appreciate everyones help!:D
Personally, I think that there is some merit to WSD and disagree that it is marketing hype. The important thing is to get fitted - at least for me, the WSD DEFINITELY makes a difference. My friend and I each got a new road bike - he got a Trek 2.3 and I got the Trek 5.2 WSD. We both got fitted at the store, and were told 54cm is our size.
My LBS gave me a very thorough fitting. I will say that this bike fits me like a glove - there was no breaking in period needed at all. I have never experienced pain anywhere since riding this bike. Even on my first 2.5 hour long ride I rode pain free. I tried my friend's bike, and it made a huge difference - I found his bike extremely uncomfortable. Now this is anecdotal, but to me it is good enough proof that I needed the WSD, and that the WSD makes a difference to me and is not just marketing hype.
Anyway, getting back to the OP's question, I would recommend a road bike (I've ridden hybrids, mountain bikes, commuters, and touring bikes). My roadie is my first ever (bought it a month or so ago) and it is the most fun I've had on a bike for a while! Also, it helps to know what your budget is.
I would definitely go with road bike and I would also reccommend going for a bike that you could use to race or do long events on because once you get into riding you will probably want to do some of these things. I bought my first road bike about six months ago and I am already wanting to upgrade to a carbon frame and nicer components so I would advise that you drop some money on a nice bike the first time around so you don't end up wanting an upgrade too soon.
My bike cost about $800 and it was one of the cheapest ones at the shop. I think the higher end ones are around $6000 although I am sure you could definetly spend more. I am planning on spending around $3000 in the spring to get a nicer bike. I really wish I would have spent a little more on the first one so I could be happy with it for longer, but it was all the money I had at the time. I really hope I can come up with the $3000 to get the bike I want by spring, but it is going to be a pain because I am now a starving college student. So the moral of the story is: buy something you can be happy with for at least a few years.
On the topic of women specific geometry, get whatever fits you best, just make sure to get a good fit at a good shop. I am 5'4'' and 130 lbs so pretty close to you and all I can say is I definitely need women specific because I have the shortest torso ever. I mean when I sit down I can pop my rib cage back and forth over my pelvis bones :eek: so if anyone fits the bill for women's specific it is me. My bike is comfortable and fits me well so just make sure to get a good fit. ;)
the difference between a road bike and a hybrid? Which would be better for fitness? And my price range will be under $1000 for my first bike. Will this be enough for a good bike?:o
Short answers:Quote:
Originally Posted by rudyb
Yes $800-1000 can get you a nice decent first bike.
Both hybrid and orad bikes will get you equally 'fit' if you ride them a lot.
Generalities:
Hybrid is slightly heavier, has you sitting a little more upright with the butt even with the handlebars, can take wider tires so you can ride on rough gravel or rough dirt roads. Often has a bigger gear range to go up steeper hills. Often has straight bars but can change that.
Road bike usually takes only skinnier tires (faster but more flats on rough terrain) is lighter weight, has you sitting more bent down in an aerodynamic position with the butt up higher than the handlebars. Often has more 'go-fast' gears but that can be changed. Usually has 'drop' bars but can be changed.
Either bike can have any kind of pedal system you want.
re: Cervelo's negation of WSD:
a LBS guy told me the exact same thing. Cervelo has analyzed data from 50'000 US and UK soldiers, both male and female. So it seems to be be true that except for being shorter, there's no difference.
yeah...Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinerabbit
cervelo actually has researched to see if there truly are differences between mens and womens physical dimensions. and there are not. the standard deviations between sexes at a particular height are far less than the standard deviations between individuals of the same sex at a particular height.
keith bontrager also agrees with cervelo. bontrager says that the whole 'womens specfic design' that has sprung up over the last several years had nothing to do with fit. it wasn't an idea suggested by fitters, designers, riders, or engineers. it was concocted by marketers and business men in a board room.
the guy that owns one of the local bike shops agrees with cervelo and bontrager. he's been in the cycling industry for 30 years. worked for trek, yeti, klein, bontrager, etc...plus several custom frame makers and designers. he said he's never had trouble fitting anyone to a bike...either before or after the genesis of womens design. he's says the only difference now is...there are more women buying bikes. they like that someone has catered to them. people like that...i like that. so the marketing may have worked!
and when you look at the women specific bike geometries, you can easily find a mens bike with exact or near exact geometry...or you will notice that the sum of the geometry differences actually puts the rider in nearly the exact same place.
LBS guys tell people a lot of things. One told me last year that no one makes steel bikes anymore, for instance. :eek: This was news to me! Others have told me equally ludicrous things from time to time. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by alpinerabbit
Lately I notice that some LBS 'guys' like to tell women that ALL the bikes in their shop are "unisex" and therefore they will all fit them, or be made to fit them. Hmmm....
So what about when I SEE the difference when couples are standing in line somewhere? I like to point it out to my DH for fun....
When I see a couple that are the same exact height and wearing similar heel heights or sneakers, I point out how his crotch is usually a couple inches lower than hers, and how his arms are longer and his fingertips end 1-3 inches below where her hands end. I seldom if ever see a same-height couple where their hands end in the same place. Try it sometime, it's fun! :D
Again, I experienced a HUGE difference for myself when I went from a standard bike (designed around typical men's proportions, and a bike which incidentally my husband also has but is totally comfortable on) to a custom bike built for me. As Cervelo notes, it's not just a simple matter of a shorter top tube. For me it was more an overall matter of poor center of gravity and balance- but the top tube length was only one geometry factor of several that had to be changed in order for a bike to fit me comfortably.
Of course there are many women who due to their body proportions have no problems feeling comfortable on stock 'unisex' (another word for men's if you ask me) bikes. And vice versa- there are many men shoe have shorter arms or longer legs who wind up needing custom bikes as well for the same reason I did.
Generalizations are just that- generalizations. So the term "women specific" is inherently flawed, I agree.
But it still has it's uses when describing certain proportion tendencies.
The bigger problem is that most LBS guys actually know or care very little about frame geometry and will happily sell you a bike that is not the right size for you. Basically they care about getting their stock off the floor.Quote:
Originally Posted by celerystalksme
I think it is most important to figure out what works for you. Sure, maybe Cervelo measured 50,000 people and determined that on average men and women are the same. But my husband is 5'8' and I'm 5'3 and his legs are only about an inch longer than mine. He and I need very different bikes. I don't know if I'm the one who's not "average" or he is, but a standard men's bike doesn't work for me. Ride lots of different brands of bike before you decide what's best!
I agree with most of Cervelo's philosophy (because I can fit just fine on men's frames, and I felt horrible on WSD frames), BUT I just wanted to say that I find it extremely ironic that the worst case of toe overlap I've ever seen is with my friend who rides a tiny Cervelo. Just sayin'...Quote:
Originally Posted by celerystalksme
If all bike manufacturers thought like Cervelo, my husband and myself would probably be stuck buying custom....
I ride a 48cm Cervelo P2C as my TT/Tri bike. With the proper length crankarms and clipless pedals....zero toe overlap. The 48cm Cervelo RS...zero toe overlap. The 48cm R3-SL...zero toe overlap. Those three bikes are MARVELOUSLY designed small frames.Quote:
Originally Posted by aicabsolut
What frame is your friend riding? Is he/she riding clipless pedals? And does he/she have the correct crankarm length? Crankarm length is an issue. Most small frames come with 170mm crankarms...because most of the industry doesn't go shorter than 170mm. But...someone riding a 48cm Cervelo probably has a inseam south of 28.5". Such a person should be using 165mm cranks (because that's the shortest standard crankarm length). However...ideally, a person with legs that short, should get custom cranks in the range of 155mm.
Shorter cranklength and clipless pedals that allow you to ride closer to the ball of your foot will eliminate toe overlap on Cervelo bikes (at least, the ones I either own, owned, or have put some time in the saddle on).
Interestingly, my 49 cm bike with 172.5 cranks (in my avatar) has no toe overlap. I actually kind of expected that it might, but it doesn't.
I'm not sure, because she got the bike used (and she has since moved abroad), but based on her riding style (she has a relatively low cadence and puts massive torque on the cranks with big gears--even up mountains), I would think that if anything the crank length is a little on the long side. I am certain they are not shorter than 170s. They could very well be 172.5. All I know for sure about the components is that she hated them, because she's a Campy fan and the bike came with Shimano parts. I think she rides a 48 or 50. Here's a picture of her from this season. Her saddle is a little low there. She'd only had the bike for a few days by the time of the picture, but that doesn't affect the toe issue, which you can kind of see even though she's not quite at 3 and 9 on the cranks.
http://photos-g.ak.facebook.com/phot...22230_3067.jpg
She didn't have any toe overlap on her old TCR.
I'm not saying Cervelos suck or anything. I'd love a 52cm TT bike (P2, P3, or *drool* P4!). It's just that for some reason this older Cervelo didn't live up to the company's goals.
It occurs to me that perhaps we are all guilty of getting a little too far removed from the original poster's questions....
Quote:
Originally Posted by rudyb
Quote:
Originally Posted by rudyb
Quote:
Originally Posted by rudyb
:D
Not unusual;)
My vote goes to the Trek FX series!
This is nice in theory. But last time I checked, soldiers were not indicative of the general population. Soldiers tend to me more muscular, more fit, and female soldiers have a much lower body fat percentage than their civilian counterparts. This means that not only will they weigh less, they will also be somewhat skinnier at the same weight, on average. This all plays into bike fit. There's more to it that an inseam to height measurement. So unless soldiers are the primary market for Cervelo bikes, maybe they should analyze data from a cross section of the bike buying population.Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinerabbit
Toe overlap: I don't get the big deal here. It doesn't affect anything anyway. I know this b/c my bike has toe overlap.
To the OP:
I agree with what's been said about checking out your local bike shop and then coming back here with what you find out. Ride a couple hybrids and a couple road bikes and see how they feel. This is a good guide for what you'll enjoy. Come back and tell us what you liked and didn't like and what you still want to know.
Happy test riding!
Anything that you enjoy riding will be good for your fitness. You may go faster or slower or over a variety of terrain depending on the type of bike, but if you're out there riding it, it will help keep you fit.Quote:
Originally Posted by rudyb
You might find that you have more options in your price range with certain types of bikes over others, but go out and ride a bunch. Also look into WHERE you intend on riding it. Mostly on the road? You might like the speed of a road bike. Do you want to hit some unpaved trails? Maybe a mountain bike, cross bike, or hybrid would be more suitable, depending on those surfaces. Do you think you'd want to eventually commute on it or need to carry gear or take long trips? Maybe you'd like a touring bike or hybrid with some racks.
Having an idea of your goals will help the bike shop staff assist you in suggesting bikes for you to try.