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!![]()
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!![]()
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.
Trying to be the person my dogs think I am.
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 bonesso 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?![]()
Short answers:
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.
Lisa
My mountain dulcimer network...FOTMD.com...and my mountain dulcimer blog
My personal blog:My blog
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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.
It's a little secret you didn't know about us women. We're all closet Visigoths.
2008 Roy Hinnen O2 - Selle SMP Glider
2009 Cube Axial WLS - Selle SMP Glider
2007 Gary Fisher HiFi Plus - Specialized Alias
yeah...
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.This was news to me! Others have told me equally ludicrous things from time to time.
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!
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.
Last edited by BleeckerSt_Girl; 09-25-2008 at 09:55 AM.
Lisa
My mountain dulcimer network...FOTMD.com...and my mountain dulcimer blog
My personal blog:My blog
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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.
Lisa
My mountain dulcimer network...FOTMD.com...and my mountain dulcimer blog
My personal blog:My blog
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
![]()
Not unusual
My vote goes to the Trek FX series!
2008 Trek FX 7.2/Terry Cite X
2009 Jamis Aurora/Brooks B-68
2010 Trek FX 7.6 WSD/stock bontrager
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.
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.