I could use some advice from people who are more experienced

>>1096852

For commuting you don't need suspension. So that is one point away from the hybrid bike.

Flat bars (on a hybrid) mean only one hand position. Most people find this uncomfortable.

They are typically heavier for a given price too.

Just do this.

Get a cheap bikesdirect bike, spend 40 dollars on the fattest tires you can put on it. You'll be perfectly happy.

Avoid
>triple chainrings
>Cheap suspension forks
>cantilever brakes.

If you live on flat ground, just get a single speed.

http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/cross_bikes.htm?gclid=CjwKCAjwk4vMBRAgEiwA4ftLs0ntevVf2I0JnF1lWDn_sCTjvXlRDUK8zB3PS4aejxWtMLVcWdwcQBoCjwQQAvD_BwE

Start here.

>>1096857
Not bad except triple chainrings are fine and even highly recommended if you live in a hilly area.

>>1096852

Why get a road bike? Most of them cannot take a fender or wider tires. It is better to get a cyclocross, touring, gravel, etc., bike. Road bikes are actually not faster since thin tires at high psi are actually far slower.

If you get a road bike, I swear I will ship you go the infamous city of Chengdu.

if you need to bring a lot of stuff with you to work get a gravel/touring bike

you really won't go much faster with a road bike anyway, it'll save you maybe 1 second/minute

>>1096871
>Most of them cannot take a fender or wider tires
Wrong. Even carbon bikes without eyelets for fenders can take full length clip-on ones. Also, bikes are 25mm standard tires now, with easy support for 28mm.

>>1096870
Triple chainrings are a nightmare for most inexperienced people to handle correctly. Better to just get a bike with a wider rear cassette instead.

>>1096871
> Road bikes are actually not faster since thin tires at high psi are actually far slower.

top bait, friend

>>1096852
For me after riding drop bars for years there is no going back. Flatbar is just limiting your hand positions for no real benefit, and in the city I'm really enjoying the agility and control that riding in drops allows.

Something like cyclocross with slicker tires would be pretty much ideal, even though I'm riding a normal roadie myself I could see the increased comfort from running 30cc+ and more relaxed geometry.

Be aware that you won't get such bike for cheap really, while touring/hybrids can be decent for a low price. But if you want a bike that will last a long time and have some fun touring around the city too, cx or a modified road bike is a way to go.

>>1096890
He clearly meant to say 'a little bit slower'. And by a little bit it's a couple watts. But the real reason wider tires are hot now is because they aren't slower, and they are more comfy.

>>1096903
>He clearly meant to say 'a little bit slower'.
And he would be equally wrong. Thin tyres can be made with more supple casing and ran at higher pressures. Wide tyres roll better if all else is equal. All else is not equal. The larger inner surface of a wide tyre means the pressure has more to act on, and the tearing force on the cord is greater. That limits how thin you can make the cord and what pressure it can be run at.
More supple casing and less material means less force to deform it as the tyre rolls. That's why the fast rolling tyres such as the GP4k has a chisel point shape rubber wear layer - to give long life on the contact line but minimal material where it hampers roll and doesn't contribute to longevity.

Two perfect examples of the effect is the Schwalbe One and the GP4k; the 4k rolls faster and faster as you go from 23 mm to 28 mm, because the cord and layout is the same across the model range. The One, however, rolls slower and slower because the 23 mm uses a thinner casing than the 28 mm.

---

tldr: nikki is a cancerous cunt and should be excised.

>>1096903
If more comfy is the reason to use wider tires why do people buy shit tier tires and use them with shit tier tubes? High quality narrow tires and quality latex tubes at pretty much any width are comfier than the shitty 30 mm tires they have.

>>1096908
Because they don't know better. Explains a lot of the counterproductive things people do in general. Not just cycling.

>>1096857
>avoid cantilever brakes
what was i smoking

>>1096885
Why, like keeping the chain line straight?

>>1096935
Triple rings shouldn't be used at all unless you live in hilly areas. I mean seriously, you get like 3x8 gears or whatever, and you can't use 6 of them because of cross chaining.
Unless you REALLY need those lower gears, just don't bother.

>>1096935
MTB: people cant into double shift
Road: endless trim of chain rattle
Both: enormous overlap on modern 9-12 spd triple groups means little to no greater range than double and barely tangible benefit in stepping.

File: nafplio_510_332_KARAVASSILI.jpg (117KB, 510x332px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 510x332px

>>1096875
Most road bikes are made to take short hood brake calipers and cannot take 28 mm tires and even if they could 28 mm is not that thick. On my cyclocross I run 38mm Compass Direct Barlow Pass ultra lights* and now that I tried that I would go to 42 mm as I notice no disadvantage on the road with 38mm but only advantages.

* https://www.compasscycle.com/shop/components/tires/700c/compass-700cx38-barlow-pass/

>>1096890
>>1096903
>>1096906
>>1096908

Getting wider supple tires is the best upgrade you can make to your bike. The thing is most people who try wide tires try cheap, harsh, hard, low quality tires meant to offer the most puncture protection but my 38mm Compass Barlow Pass Ultra Lights cost $78 each tire, total $180 with NJ taxes. Read this article:

Article:
https://janheine.wordpress.com/2012/06/13/bicycle-quarterly-performance-of-tires/

>Wider tires roll faster. A Michelin Pro2 Race in 25 mm width was faster than the same tire’s 23 mm version, which in turn was faster than the 20 mm version.

>...

>On steel drums, wider tires were slower because they had to run at relatively low pressures. Once we had shown that the high pressures served little benefit, it became clear that on real roads, wider tires are faster, period.

Most the idiot Fred infuenced bike industry and its racer wannabe target demographic believe erroneously that thin tires at high psi were faster because of feedback from idiotic steel drum tests... The nonsense that goes on in cycling is unbelievable.

And listen to this Podcast to find out why wide supple tires are not only more comfortable, they make you go faster, etc.:
http://cyclingtips.com/2016/08/cyclingtips-podcast-episode-9-rethinking-road-bike-tire-sizes-and-pressures/

>>1096971
Factor in aero and increased weight and most of the gains are lost.
But you're more comfy.

>>1096971
>38 mm
>gain 2 rolling resistance watts
>lose 10 aero watts

>>1096852
>for commuting.
A touring bike is probably the best advice I can give you with my limited experience because all the racks give you plenty of cargo ability, something I started appreciating after a while of commuting.
Now I barely even touch my car even when shopping. Just strap that shit on your bike and off you go.

I seriously doubt you're going to get anywhere near "road bike speed" in the city. Plus they're flimsy pieces of dookie and a flashing beacon for every thief in the area.

>>1096857
>For commuting you don't need suspension
Depends....

>Flat bars (on a hybrid) mean only one hand position.
What are sidebars?

OP don't listen to this fag, he knows nothing.

>>1096885
The fuk are u on about? LOL

>>1096852
Road bikes are for racers. No comfort just speed.Not a good choice for commuting.

>>1097036
frankly i do mtb in the hills and could lock out fork 99% of the time and barely know the difference. i lock out innacity almost always except when going down stairs or something.

>>1096852
unironically a 90s rigid mtb is the best general commuter

>>1096978
...if you ride on a steel drum or the velodrome.

>>1096977
>>1096978

Did you fools even read the linked article or listen to the podcast I linked here:
>>1096971

NO! So you continue to yap nonsense... Wider tires actually have a more ideal contact patch, as they are less deformed by rider weight and thus they HAVE LESS ROLLING RESISTANCE THAN A THINNER TIRE AND NOT MORE. See:

http://www.velonews.com/2014/12/bikes-and-tech/resistance-futile-tire-pressure-width-affect-rolling-resistance_355085

>Width versus rolling resistance

>Tire rolling resistance on the road is caused by (1) internal friction and hysteresis (deformation over time) within the tire’s materials, and (2) on rough roads, small bumps lifting the bike and rider slightly (uphill) on each little impact.

>By definition, wider tires will have shorter contact patches and, hence, less tire deflection; if the tire pressure is the same, the area of the contact patch must be the same to support the same load. The shorter the contact patch, the lower the vertical depth of tire deflection; the internal friction and hysteresis within the tire’s materials is lower.

>If a wider tire is made of the same materials in the same thickness as a narrower one, it will roll faster, because (1) the internal friction and hysteresis within the tire’s materials will be lower, and (2) because the surface imperfections in the road will be absorbed into the tire more easily (since it has more deflection available), thus lifting the bike and rider slightly less with each little impact.

And:
http://road.cc/content/feature/182519-trend-spotting-why-you-need-switch-wider-tyres

And:
http://www.velonews.com/2012/03/bikes-and-tech/technical-faq/tech-faq-seriously-wider-tires-have-lower-rolling-resistance-than-their-narrower-brethren_209268

And:
http://flocycling.blogspot.com/2011/11/flo-cyling-contact-patch-why-wider-is.html

>>1097060
Someone posting to an English language cycling board, who is not a total retard and knows something.

File: sprudotheabsolute.png (310KB, 655x977px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 655x977px

>>1097099
Take your meds and calm down.

>>1097036
salty poor-fag who cant afford a roadbike

>>1096857
how do I avoid triple chain rings. Im building an ebike and its hard as hell to find a cheap mtb or hybrid that has disk brakes but not too much gearing to hassle with.

Like, I was looking at the insight 2 by diamondback and that shit is only 320 bucks, and should make a decent roll machine. Is it possible to take off the triple chainrings later on if it starts fucking up? Or is it better to just buy a different bike?

>>1096852

How far is your commute? What is the road surface like? Where will you be able to lock/store your bike while at work/home? What type of bikes are in your area?

After close to ten years commuting by bicycle I would say wider tires are better but don't get knobby off road tires if you will only ride on the road (even for gravel). Make sure you can attach fenders and racks (even you don't want those right now). Drop bars are probably your best choice in the long run.

If you have a safe place to lock up the bike and a commute longer than 15-20 minutes of riding I would encourage you to spend around $1000-$1200 for a touring/gravel/adventure type road bike with generous tire clearances, drop bars, and eyelets for fenders. Anything you get in that price range will have okay gearing, brakes, and other parts no matter what brand of bike it is. It won't be too fancy but it will be a good commuter.

Shorter commute look for something like a used English 3-speed with internal gear hub and fenders. It probably will not get stolen, it will not be fast, it will be pretty reliable, will be good in any weather except snow and likely inexpensive.

Buy a good lock

You do not need clipless pedals

Avoid suspension unless you really are commuting on single track

>>1097150
Can you just not shift to the small ring on the front ever, effectively having a 2 x ?

>>1096857
>Avoid

>triple chainrings
>cantilever brakes

Come at me bro

>>1097190
I guess I could. I'll probably never bother shifting at all, area is all flat city and Imma thumb throttle all day. I'm just looking for the perfect bike to fit my needs and I hate paying for things I dont need. Unfortunately bikes are built in logical increments, so its hard to find a single speed with disk brakes. I'm already at a good price point so I'm just nitpicking at this point.

>>1097060
>>1097099
>focus entirely on rolling resistance
>buy 38 mm tires
>have the best rolling tires you can find
>mount them on your bike
>bike becomes less efficient because the fuckhueg tires cause massive drag
Rolling resistance isn't everything you mongrels.

File: commuter.jpg (3MB, 2601x1759px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2601x1759px

>>1096852
I would prefer a hybrid with a longer wheelbase and eyelets for a rack. I would never choose a backpack for commuting, always panniers, because I hate a unnecessarily sweaty back and the feeling of a backpack.

Longer wheelbase means you won't hit the panniers with your feet while riding. Also, you are less likely to have trouble with touching your front fenders with your shoes which is particularly annoying.

pic related my commuter/touring hybrid

File: b34ed0a3adffb0d63fe574d5e90c0b74ba77c2ea70b9d5a298a9647db147a55f.jpg (33KB, 468x281px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 468x281px

>>1097234
Well, not only that, but because nikkis illiterate he hasn't caught on to the fact that thinner tyres can be made with thinner walls and therefore lower rolling resistance than fatter ones, and that wider is only faster if the two tyres are built the same. Which they wouldn't be as that would mean a seriously overbuilt thin tyre or incredibly fragile thick.

I also comes as no surprise that the most obviously mentally unwell faggot on this fine subreddit happens to be a Heine dick rider.

>>1097234
>>1097242
I think you guys are forgetting entirely that you are in a casual commuter bike thread, and that wind is only a major factor at top speeds where wind become a larger factor than the power you put out (something like terminal velocity...).

At lower speeds that a commuter is more likely to operate at, wind simply isnt the biggest factor.

Also, youre ignoring thicker tires benefits for dealing with all the glass and shit in cities, and short trips offroad when required. You guys seem like tryhards out of touch.

>Hi I use my computer for browsing facebook
>here, buy this 1400 dollar gaming computer with 16 gigs of ram

the worst kind of people

File: 1501545317294.jpg (40KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 320x320px

>>1097243
>reddit spaced
Didn't read.

>>1097243
actually wind alters your relative speed
it can suck ass no matter what level you are riding on

>>1097105
Yes because there are no expensive hybrids or cheap race bikes.
Road bikes are for racers with lycra, helmets and click pedals. Not commuters.

>>1097234
>>bike becomes less efficient because the fuckhueg tires cause massive drag

The drag of a bike is insignificant compared to the drag of a human rider on a bike:

http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/product-news/lightweight-vs-aero-which-is-best-164656

>Aerodynamic drag still matters more than you almost certainly think it does. ...

>Happily, you can get most of the benefit by tweaking your position, because something like four-fifths of the drag is off the rider, not the bike.

Only 1/5th the aero drag is from the whole bike, now imagine the insignificant drag would be accounted for by switching from 23mm tires to 30+mm tires...

>>1097242
Nerd, I used alot of sources that are not from Heine, here:
>>1097099

You /n/tards are just uninformed like most of the "medieval" cycling world.

>>1097245
but is it the LARGEST factor at lower speeds? Join the conversation please. No one here is arguing that wind doesn't exist you tard.

>>1097244
Your post makes me SO mad! I wish I could downvote it and get all my friends to downvote it too! I'm going back to /reddit/! This place makes me so angry!!! I miss my username (rainbow_dash_furry_lover99) so much and all my up voted posts too! I'm going to log in to reddit and never come back, all thanks to your comment!

File: spurdopede.jpg (561KB, 1228x960px) Image search: [Google]

561KB, 1228x960px

>>1097289
>Nerd, I used alot of sources that are not from Heine
Which doesn't in the least counted the claim that you're a Heine dick rider. That was still a correctly made observation.
>>1097289
>You /n/tards are just uninformed blah blah chengdu magic the gathering stalker idiot reeeeee
>hhurrdurr steal drumbs autismal rambling
Damn it nikki, I'm not disputing your sources. It is you that don't understand them and their context. A wide tyre rolls better, all else equal. That is one parameter out of many in a complex reality. It does not mean an unknown wider tyres roll better in practice, as the GP4k/One example shows. The effect is not only offset but completely dwarfed by the impact of casing suppleness and rubber losses - and smaller tyres can be made much more supple. It is roughly square law.
It doesn't quite make it to square law in practice, as thinner tyres need to be run at higher pressure to prevent snakebite, reducing but not cancelling the advantage.

tldr: God fucking damn it nikki, how do you end up being so fucking completely wrong about everything, and so unbearably full of yourself at the same time? Why are you such an insecure, cancerous loser? Fucking die already.

>>1097366
>God fucking damn it nikki, how do you end up being so fucking completely wrong about everything, and so unbearably full of yourself at the same time?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

File: spurdogruciby.jpg (31KB, 480x740px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 480x740px

>>1097371
Yeah, a lot of that. And bipolar disorder. And narcissistic personality disorder. And paranoid delusions. And a pinch of the ol' 'tism.

There's only one cure for nikki.

>>1097243
> wind only a major factor at high speeds

Guess how I can tell you live where there is not much wind?

>>1097423
More likely he doesn't go long distances. Even a 5mph headwind is frustrating enough with when you're riding for an hour+ and you've got a pannier acting like a sail and you got a late start. Let alone a real headwind like when it's stormy out

Especially when it decides to turn 180 degrees 8 hours later for the ride home

But retards love to shit on efficient stuff when it comes to bikes because THE DUTCH DO IT THIS WAY AND IF YOU DON'T DO IT THIS WAY YOU'RE WRONG

>>1097058
>unironically a 90s rigid mtb is the best general commuter
this
commuters are always a compromise between speed, sturdiness, cargo capacity and reliability
90s rigids are a pretty good compromise bike that can be had for cheap

>>1097150
>Is it possible to take off the triple chainrings later on if it starts fucking up?
the fuck?
a triple isn't gonna break on you or anything
roadies don't like them because they don't look cool
and mtbers can't be assed to shift in front and back so they dont use them
they're good for commuters though

>>1097206
>its hard to find a single speed with disk brakes
yeah, because there's no point in building one
if its a ss then it won't be able to go up hills well
the only reason to have disks is if you're going down massive hills often
so your asking for a bike that can only handle flat terrain
that's equipped like a mtb

>>1096939
>triple chainrings shouldn't be used because if you don't use them right they cross chain more than doubles which is like the ultimate taboo even worse than having a bike capable of being used correctly
Jesus christ /n/

>>1096939
modern drive-trains tolerate cross-chaining rather well.

>>1097489

But you still lose stupid amounts of power to it.

>>1097501
Um, no sweetie you dont. Modern chains tolerate crosschaining very well and you're talking low single digit power on a well maintained 11spd chain.

>>1096852
What's wrong with your current bike?

>>1097036
>cantilever brakes
>Depends
Everything depends you faggot.

>sidebars
They literally put newbies in a hand position where they often have a slow reaction time to reach their brakes. Sidebars are pretty much just for climbing on a mountain bike and nothing else.

>road bikes are for racers
No, they're for roads. Race bikes are for racers.

Bikes-->Road Bikes-->Race Bikes

OOP basics faggot

>>1097510

Uh, you pathetic condescending little fuckboi. It's well into double digit percentage loss for the most egregious gear combinations.

I much prefer fat bars due to preference and also becaus eI ride in traffic where it's in my interest to be a bit more upright and be able to look around easier. On drop bars I have to reach forward to brake which generally means my head has to go lower.

File: 1428527912931-18p1w5i8kxox1-630-80.jpg (25KB, 630x354px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 630x354px

>>1097629
>It's well into double digit percentage loss for the most egregious gear combinations.
Um, no sweetie, see this is where you are making things up in your pretty little head. Look at the graph.
It's nearly 9 W with a perfectly straight 53-11 chainline, and then losses _decrease_ as you cross chain because the higher efficiency of larger cogs more than offset the puny impact chain line has.

Also, look at how the graph is cropped. It starts at 5 W and tops out at 10 W. We can see that the whole range - from best to worst cross chain combination - is within 3 W. That can be expressed as +/- 1.5 W deviation from a base line. You'd have to be outputting less than 150 W to even make it one whole percentage point. To make it double digits you'd be doing 15 W, or 30 W if we're being generous by comparing best to worst rather than base line. At 30 W you're barely staying upright, cheekums.

Sorry sweet cheeks, but you don't have a clue about these things. Keep raging about imaginary cross chain inefficiencies if you must, but do it up on your room and let the grown-ups talk undisturbed. Bye!

>>1097629
>If you instead insist on staying in the big ring all the way up to the 28t cassette cog – thus putting the chain at an extreme angle – you’re actually pushing about 0.75w more than necessary had you instead shifted to the 39-21t.
Please, read and be educated rather than conjecturing what is actually fractions of a watt.
http://www.bikeradar.com/us/road/gear/article/friction-facts-free-speed-from-proper-shifting-44016/

>>1097621
>Sidebars are pretty much just for climbing on a mountain bike and nothing else.

Have u ever seen the the different sidebars available for touring bikes? U know nothing

People here refer to race bikes as road bikes. Don't know why, but that's how it is.

OOP basics faggot

>>1097736
>u
>u

Your zinger at the end kind of missed its target since it was not directed at you.

>>1096857
>>1096852
I'd get a cheap disc brake CX bike from bikes direct. You'll want something that can handle rain and shit. A hybrid is better than a road bike for bad weather. A CX bike beats them both. I have a friend who owns a motobecane cx bike with 28mm slicks (Conti 4 seasons) and he uses it for winter riding. It's good shit.

>>1096852
Old (~1980s) steel road bike.
>fast
>comfy
>most are compatible with racks
>not appealing to thieves, yet still good quality and well functioning
craigslist.com
>>>/n/bbg
If you get a modern road bike for commuting you're a moron. 1980s road bikes=god tier commuters, modern road bikes=shit tier to medium tier commuters

>>1097998
>cheap cx bike from bikesdirect
This has literally nothing on an 80s steel road bike and will have shit-tier components.

>>1097990
I mean since you didn't reply to the criticism it was for.

You can ride to work on a $4000 roadbike if you really wanted, the important thing is it gets you from A to B.
Everything else is just finances. $4000 bikes are theft targets for sure, and you don't want to be wearing out a dura-ace in the winter.
Not too cheap so it's not going to die on you, and not more expensive than you're willing to spend.

>>1098003
>Shit-tier components

If you have ever worked in a bike shop you'll know these two things
>OTS bikes from the 80's are extremely heavy stock. The components are usually fine but they didn't work well to begin with.

>Even the cheapest 10 dollar Shimano derailleur can shift perfectly.

The only difference between cheap components and mid-tier components is the ability to take a hit. The only difference between mid-tier and expensive components is the weight.

So long as the bike does not have grip-shifters, it will work perfectly if it is tuned properly.

Are modern, well set up, cantilevers still as shit as I remember them being when I was a kid? I'm looking at a commuter with cantilevers and it's the only thing I'm hesitant about.

>>1098003
Most 80s road bikes have shit components. Flexy chainsets, fucking awful early attempts at indexing, friction shifters that take all day to move the fucking chain from one cog to the next even when new, brakes that require deathgripping to generate much stopping power, rubber rims, etc. Yeah, if you find something rocking a full Superbe Pro, DA7400, or 600 with fresh pulleys and shit, great. But none of them are even as good as Claris, which offers shifting controls on the levers, better brakes (once you dump the shitty Shimano pads for kool stops or whatever), and good indexed shifting.

I guess that if you want to be a really odd duck you get an 80s road bike with 600 tricolor and put Claris brifters on.

>>1096852
OP go for a testride on both.

>>1098051
Yes, they're still shit. They only continue to exist because of some weight weenie CXers, retrogrouch tourers, and cheap shitters. Get disc brakes.

>>1098051
As long as you set them up correctly they're good.

>>1098051
Standard cantilevers are not worth it. Get good vbrakes live Avid Single digit 7.

>>1097366

Your moronic ass:
>The effect is not only offset but completely dwarfed by the impact of casing suppleness

The second fucking post I made into this thread:
>>1096971

>Getting wider supple tires is the best upgrade you can make to your bike. The thing is most people who try wide tires try cheap, harsh, hard, low quality tires meant to offer the most puncture protection ...

Seriously why are there so many myth spouting idiots posting on English cycling discussions?

>>1096852
Get a downhill mountain bike. The unassisted bicycle speed record was set on one so it's clearly the best design for getting somewhere fast.

>>1098466
Leave, autist, and never come back.