Fast Commute Advice Wanted

SECommuter

I have a budget of around £1000 (on cycle scheme) and am interested in a fast commute hybrid.

Three have caught my eye and wondering if anyone owns one, has test ridden one or has an opinion on them.

Bianchi Camaleonte 5
Giant FCR Alliance
Ridgeback Flight 05

I am 6’2” and 16 stone (sounds like a dating profile) and will mainly use for a 12 mile round trip commute, through average London streets (pot holes and quite a few speed bumps).

I currently have an avg hard tail that I ride pretty hard on this journey and my main priorities are higher spec components and a reduction in bike weight (yes maybe I should knock something off that 16 stone, but its all healthy weight).

No offense to the roadie fans, but I am not keen, it has to have flat bars.

Thanks

fnegroni

For the trip you describe, your bike weight will not matter much.
What will matter is whether you have a front suspension fork. If you do, change it to a fixed fork.
That alone will make your bike a lot easier to push through start/stop traffic.
And if you do worry about potholes, than just stick some 1.5" MTB slick tyres on and you will be 99% there with anyone else.

Eau Rouge

Clearly London is a perfectly fine environment for skinny roadie tyres, potholes and dodgy surfaces accepted, or half the board here would never make it to work every day.

If you really want flat bars, get a flat barred road bike, ala the Giant FCR or Specialzed Sirrius or whatever the Trek flat-barred roadie is (there are others like those too)
You'll get most of the benefits of a road bike (stiffer frame for better power transfer, lighter frame, thinner wheels to run thinnner tyres, lighter brakes, road gearing, etc all of which will help you go faster) but still have the flat bars you feel you need.

biondino

Trek 7.9 FX, is that right?

ShaunL

I commute on a Focus Cross Disc, thoroughly recommend it to any commuters out there.

teagar

Fixed gear steel!

meanwhile

fnegroni wrote:

For the trip you describe, your bike weight will not matter much.
What will matter is whether you have a front suspension fork. If you do, change it to a fixed fork.
That alone will make your bike a lot easier to push through start/stop traffic.
And if you do worry about potholes, than just stick some 1.5" MTB slick tyres on and you will be 99% there with anyone else.

At 16 stone being able to run reasonably wide tyres is important. If you buy a 700c bike make sure that it can take at least 38mm tyres. But a non-suspension MTB with slicks might be a better bet - you can go wider, the frame is sure to be tough, it's easier to find a disc brake bike with better stopping power in the wet, and 26'' wheels turn noticeably better than 700c for traffic jamming.

So I'd look at, say, whatever Kona hardtail suits your fancy and the flat bar version of the Cotic Roadrat (by rep the ultimate urban hybrid and definitely very strong.) I weigh about 220lb and only 5'10'' (apparently my body is some kind of natural steroid factory - I can bulk up just looking at something heavy) so believe me this is heart felt advice:

- Room for at least 38mm tyres
- No suspension
- Strong frame

meanwhile

Eau Rouge wrote:

Clearly London is a perfectly fine environment for skinny roadie tyres, potholes and dodgy surfaces accepted, or half the board here would never make it to work every day.

If you really want flat bars, get a flat barred road bike, ala the Giant FCR or Specialzed Sirrius or whatever the Trek flat-barred roadie is (there are others like those too)
You'll get most of the benefits of a road bike (stiffer frame for better power transfer,

This is complete nonsense based on bike maker's marketing and nothing else. Really: check the science and engineering studies using google. Bikes do not lose energy in their frames! If they did you'd feel them getting pretty hot on a fast ride - heat being where waste energy ends up.

lighter frame,

Not a good idea at 16 stone.

thinner wheels to run thinnner tyres,

Not a good idea at 16 stone.

lighter brakes,

Than discs, yes. Than v's etc, no. This is silly.

..In fact it's even sillier even than that The guy isn't riding in a race on hills, he's commuting in a fairly flat city, and making a weight reduction of a few grams on a total bike + rider weight of 250-260lb is a ridiculous weigh to choose a braking system. A weight saving of perhaps 1/10000 total system weight will make no difference to speed.

road gearing, etc all of which will help you go faster) but still have the flat bars you feel you need.

The guy weighs 16 stone! The Sirrus is a bike that trades off strength for weight reduction (ie marketing appeal) and can't run tyres fatter than 32mm. It also comes - like most Specs - with weak rims with too few spokes, to make it look kewl. It's an awful bike to suggest to a guy who weighs 230lbs. Buying a hybrid that's designed to be as much as possible like a racing bike designed for skinny people is just silly if the rider is built like a weight lifter.

meanwhile

Anyway, rather than continuing to ask for advice here - where it will often be supplied by 10 stone professional bike consumers who think that you should buy a bike as much like their's as possible - I suggest the OP go to www.bikeforums.net and ask for advice on the Clydesdale forum, which is dedicated to 200+ lb riders.

roger_merriman

one thing i'd mention is i know you'd like flat bars but the more sporty ie less sit up and beg and head down ass up. more likely you'll find you'll get stiff hands. some suffer from it some don't as ever.

don't rule out roadies as too fragile plenty of club cylists are your weight and more, but don't feel you need drops for speed.

my old MTB with slicks and it's old cross country head down postion was great to blast though town, very fast secure bike. it's now living out it's days as a kiddy carrier with my sister in it's dotage.

UndercoverElephant

meanwhile wrote:

The guy weighs 16 stone!

Seriously, that's only just 100 kgs. I would assume that almost any bike would be able to carry that much weight. The frames on modern bikes are exceptionally strong, even the carbon race-whippet ones. Agreed that the wheels may not last as long with a heavier rider, but he's hardly a monster now, is he? Who's to say? After a couple of months commuting he may have dropped a few pounds anyway.

Most decent bikes have along warranty on frames etc. as well. Buy what you want to, or, even better, borrow someone else's bike for a couple of weeks and find out more about what kind of rider you are.

il_principe

UndercoverElephant wrote:

meanwhile wrote:

The guy weighs 16 stone!

Seriously, that's only just 100 kgs. I would assume that almost any bike would be able to carry that much weight. The frames on modern bikes are exceptionally strong, even the carbon race-whippet ones. Agreed that the wheels may not last as long with a heavier rider, but he's hardly a monster now, is he? Who's to say? After a couple of months commuting he may have dropped a few pounds anyway.

Most decent bikes have along warranty on frames etc. as well. Buy what you want to, or, even better, borrow someone else's bike for a couple of weeks and find out more about what kind of rider you are.

Magnus Backstedt weighed 94kg at one point in his career (2005)

a roadbike isn't going to snap under a 100kg rider. You just have to be a little careful with wheel choice.

lost_in_thought

Bikes do not lose energy in their frames

Really? Are you sure that energy expended in twisting a less stiff frame is still transferred to the road? Becuase I'm not.

But then I haven't read any engineering studies on google lately so maybe I'm just not as well-informed as you are. :roll:

jonginge

lost_in_thought wrote:

Bikes do not lose energy in their frames

Really? Are you sure that energy expended in twisting a less stiff frame is still transferred to the road? Becuase I'm not.

But then I haven't read any engineering studies on google lately so maybe I'm just not as well-informed as you are. :roll:

Indeed. The rebound transfers (most of) the stored energy into your legs and causes additional fatigue, which on longer rides you'll begin to feel.

DonDaddyD

I don't know if i should "Meanwhile" seriously or not... most of his posts seem to be purposely antagonistic and largely incorrect.

I'm 15/16 stone or there about's. I've owned three bikes at that weight a Giant M2, a Giant SCR (road bike) and a carbon fibre bike. None have had frame failure nor have the wheels buckled under my wieght. In fact I've only once had to get my wheels trued outside of a periodical service.

As for the energy thing. :roll:

roger_merriman

DonDaddyD wrote:

Is meanwhile actually being serious and trying to be helpful with his posts or is he purposely writing utter and monumental rubbish to mis-inform others and spark up an argument i.e. troll.

the thought has passed passed though my mind too.

Stuey01

The clydesdale forum might say 200lb and up, but in reality it is a lot bigger than that. At 200lb there is no need to place any restrictions on what type of bike you buy due to your weight.

I weigh 15 stone (95 kg) and haven't bent my road bike yet, on London's roads. With 23mm (gasp) tyres.

He's asking for a FAST commute bike. A bike with 38mm tyres will not be fast, end of.

blu3cat

Stuey01 wrote:

The clydesdale forum might say 200lb and up, but in reality it is a lot bigger than that. At 200lb there is no need to place any restrictions on what type of bike you buy due to your weight.

I weigh 15 stone (95 kg) and haven't bent my road bike yet, on London's roads. With 23mm (gasp) tyres.

He's asking for a FAST commute bike. A bike with 38mm tyres will not be fast, end of.

+1, i'm currently about 92KG, and loaded up with lock and commuting gear closer to the magic 100KG, and have had no problems with 700c wheels and 23mm tyres, hell even a 23mph to 0 instantaneous deceleration into the back of a van only pushed the front one out by about 1cm, 5 minutes in a truing stand later...... (wrote off the frame and forks though).

Aidanw

I weigh 18 stone and ride a Condor Agio with 23mm tyres.

2 punctures in the year I have had it, both glass rather than snakebite punctures.

Keep the tyres up to 90-110 psi and you can smash through most things (just have to lift your ass off the saddle and keep elbows supple)
my round trip is 12 miles or a few yards over.

boneyjoe

Sadly I've no helpful advice on this topic - much like the rest of the posters!

DonDaddyD

You have a point.

My advice would be to try the big three. Trek, Giant and Specialized.

Personally I would go for whatever Sirrus (Specialized) costs £1000.

Most bike shops should have at least one example.

Stuey01

From the bikes you've listed I'd probably go for the Ridgeback, seem to remember it reviewed really well in Cycling plus.

Greg T

My school boy physics said something about

Energy = Mass X Velocity Squared.

It would appear (and here I'm really out of my Space - like we are talking BIG PUNT) that if we expect frames and wheels to crumple under load (and let's face it the board is full of "I applied my brakes and my bike collapsed under the strain" type comments) that load would be composed primarily of E.

If the above formula is true (anyone fancy disproving that one on a cycling board?) then the main factor at play is velocity.

The skinny fast guy will rapidly create more energy than his big lumbering mate who can't match his pace.

Even if he does match his pace he's not going to significantly exceed it as we all max out somewhere less than 35 mph anyway. At that speed it's still speed that plays the biggest factor - not weight. skinny rider = 75 Kg big rider = 100 kg it's not double is it?

Last time I looked I didn't see a "this bike is only to be used at speeds less than 25 miles an hour by 85Kg riders." warning sticker on my bike.

Big boys ride road bikes - they are robust - made out of steel tubes - like cars - or carbon - like other cars.

Now - where's the fizzycyst to blow up my idea?

Christophe3967

roger merriman wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Is meanwhile actually being serious and trying to be helpful with his posts or is he purposely writing utter and monumental rubbish to mis-inform others and spark up an argument i.e. troll.

the thought has passed passed though my mind too.

+1. Rather has previous on the opinionated spouting front. Clearly passionate about the issue at hand and has over-whelmed us by the sheer brilliance of his arguments. We probably just don't get it because we lack the necessary brain cells for competent thought.... So, I'm getting on my MTB tomorrow and to hell with the osteopath's bills. :roll: