Starting on heavier bike

suzyb
suzyb Posts: 3,449
edited February 2010 in Commuting chat
Reading geordiefella thread about his year of commuting got me thinking.

Is it better to start on a heavier bike than a light roadie. If your unfit would cycling on a heavy hybrid or BSO not be better for building your fitness than a really light road bike.
Whippet

Comments

  • Oddjob62
    Oddjob62 Posts: 1,056
    suzyb wrote:
    If your unfit would cycling on a heavy hybrid or BSO not be better for building your fitness than a really light road bike.

    You could say that riding a heavy bike is good for improving your fitness
    You could say that riding a light bike fast is good for improving your fitness

    If you are pushing yourself it will be good for you fitness either way.
    As yet unnamed (Dolan Seta)
    Joelle (Focus Expert SRAM)
  • lost_in_thought
    lost_in_thought Posts: 10,563
    I wouldn't ever advise someone to start on a heavier bike....

    But saying that I commuted for some years as fast as I could on the 'old commuter' (follow link in signature) going as fast as I could, and when I swapped to a fixed gear (one extreme to the other-ish) it was like I'd had a warp drive fitted. Fantastic.

    So yeah, it can be good. And lugging a massive bike made of pig iron around does good things for your leg strength.
    FCN 7/1
    Viner Maxima, Tifosi CK7, Giant Bowery, Old commuter.
  • Aidy
    Aidy Posts: 2,015
    edited February 2010
    Sorta depends.

    Riding "good" bikes is more enjoyable - the more enjoyable something is, the more likely you are to want to keep doing it.

    I suspect most people with decent bikes started out on much cheaper bikes though, few people are willing to go out and spend sizable amounts of money on bikes unless they know they're going to use them.
  • N0bodyOfTheGoat
    N0bodyOfTheGoat Posts: 6,050
    Different posters will have quite different priorities in their eyes for a commuting bike...

    My Felt F5C, bought in easter 2007, got me back into cycling again. Its lightness really helped, as my fitness had nose dived since 2000. However, a £1300 RRP bike (although I got it for £900) was a tad extragavent! :shock:

    Last March, I found a great deal on an Alfine hub geared bike, the Saracen Pylon8 for £300. It was the maintenance free, reliability of these hub gears, along with PF broof Marathon Pluses which made it perfect for commuting. Yes, it was heavy(ish) at 13Kg, but it is fun to ride and the more upright position helped keep my summer 2008 back muscle injury happier. :D

    Just before Xmas '09, I started a new job, where I could not lock my bike up inside the warehouse (unlike last job). Given the "nick me please" fluorescent orange of the Pylon8, making teenagers eyes glaze over, I needed a new commuting steed. I bought a Specialized Tricross Singlecross for £350 from a LBS (Hargroves), quite an understated bike, but it is within a kilo of the Felt! Given its lightness, the single gear has been no probs, plus the massive tyre clearance means I can fit some 40+mm wide semi-slick tyres for some fun off-road riding with it too. Given the recent weather and my lack of organising insurance so far, although I have the Granit-X lock ready, the Tricross has not been to work yet, but it will happen soon! :lol:

    The Pylon8 is about to become a proper XC bike, as I have some Recon Race forks arriving on Monday, thanks to the Wiggle killer deal of £147. I'm really looking forward to having my first suspensioned bike > BSO qulaity. 8)
    ================
    2020 Voodoo Marasa
    2017 Cube Attain GTC Pro Disc 2016
    2016 Voodoo Wazoo
  • roger_merriman
    roger_merriman Posts: 6,165
    A heavy bike is unlikely to be fun to commute on, I commute very short distance on a 50lb/23KG bike.

    Bar the snow and ice it's not a fun ride, it's just a potter to work and back.

    if you want a fun commute get a nicer lighter bike.
  • cjcp
    cjcp Posts: 13,345
    As NO says, we all have quite different priorities.

    In my case, I presently have a 33-mile round trip, but it gets longer in the summer if I want to add on a few miles. I need something which gets we to and from work reasonably quickly because I leave the house at 8am so I can see the kids more in the morning. So, I use (although not atm due to equipment malfunction) an alu drop bars road bike - it's quicker than a mtb by some 10 mins each way and for less effort, too - which helps when I want to add on extra miles to the commute, so I can use the commute as training for sportives. It's heavier and less stiff than my carbon "nice" bike, which is particularly noticeable on hills.

    Oh yeah, and haring up and down Embankment has helped enormously, too. :)
    FCN 2-4.

    "What happens when the hammer goes down, kids?"
    "It stays down, Daddy."
    "Exactly."
  • whyamihere
    whyamihere Posts: 7,714
    Riding a heavy bike won't make you any faster. It will just make you slower. Changing to the summer bike is nice, because the lower weight means you go faster, but you don't gain any more power by riding a heavy bike compared to a light one.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,418
    I have read in various places that it's far easier to lose a bit of weight yourself than reduce the weight of your bike. Being a bit of a skinny bloke, I've not really noticed the extra weight of a steel frame over alu or carbon (when I've borrowed other bikes), but I can always tell when I'm carrying extra heavy baggage (D-lock, laptop, books, etc.). It's the overall weight of you + bike + baggage that's important.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • suzyb
    suzyb Posts: 3,449
    rjsterry wrote:
    I have read in various places that it's far easier to lose a bit of weight yourself than reduce the weight of your bike.
    No doubt decided upon by some skinny runt whose never needed to loose any weight themselves :evil:
    Whippet
  • cjcp
    cjcp Posts: 13,345
    Aidy's point about how you're more likely to enjoy riding on a nice bike is a good one. My first road bike was Tifosi CK4. I loved riding it, so looked forward to riding it.

    If I ride my mtb on the commute, eventually it becomes a real slog and the enjoyment sort of goes out of it.

    To improve your fitness, you should vary your riding e.g. longer, steadier rides, shorter faster rides, hill reps.
    FCN 2-4.

    "What happens when the hammer goes down, kids?"
    "It stays down, Daddy."
    "Exactly."
  • suzyb
    suzyb Posts: 3,449
    Surely you can enjoy the ride on a heavier bike. You may not be able to go as fast and it will be harder going uphill but it can still be enjoyable.
    Whippet
  • whyamihere
    whyamihere Posts: 7,714
    suzyb wrote:
    Surely you can enjoy the ride on a heavier bike. You may not be able to go as fast and it will be harder going uphill but it can still be enjoyable.
    A heavier bike, certainly. Higher quality bikes are more fun to ride though, and high quality bikes tend to be lighter.
  • Tonymufc
    Tonymufc Posts: 1,016
    whyamihere wrote:
    Riding a heavy bike won't make you any faster. It will just make you slower. Changing to the summer bike is nice, because the lower weight means you go faster, but you don't gain any more power by riding a heavy bike compared to a light one.

    Why? I was thinking the exact opposite. Surely if you can push that heavy bike at 20mph then when you jump on the summer machine it won't require the same amount of power to acheive that speed.
  • Oddjob62
    Oddjob62 Posts: 1,056
    Tonymufc wrote:
    Why? I was thinking the exact opposite. Surely if you can push that heavy bike at 20mph then when you jump on the summer machine it won't require the same amount of power to acheive that speed.

    If you want to train the amount of force you need to "push", just use the light bike in a higher gear.
    As yet unnamed (Dolan Seta)
    Joelle (Focus Expert SRAM)
  • cjcp
    cjcp Posts: 13,345
    suzyb wrote:
    Surely you can enjoy the ride on a heavier bike. You may not be able to go as fast and it will be harder going uphill but it can still be enjoyable.

    What sort of "heavy bike" are you considering? One way of getting fitter by making things harder would be to buy a turbo trainer and increase the resistance.
    FCN 2-4.

    "What happens when the hammer goes down, kids?"
    "It stays down, Daddy."
    "Exactly."
  • Eau Rouge
    Eau Rouge Posts: 1,118
    Tonymufc wrote:
    Why? I was thinking the exact opposite. Surely if you can push that heavy bike at 20mph then when you jump on the summer machine it won't require the same amount of power to acheive that speed.

    Once your going at 20mph I don't think it matters how heavy the bike is anymore. You need to put effort in to overcome wind resistance and the various sources of friction (freehub, wheels, tyres etc), but not the weight of the bike. Weight is only a factor when accelerating or when climbing. However much weight you lose, you accelerate faster and climb better on a lighter bike.
    It's not just about weight though. The friction you need to overcome to maintain a speed is reduced through better components, especially wheel hubs. I had a set of Fulcrum Racing Zeros for a couple of weeks that felt like they would stay rotating forever. They were a joy to ride. Stiffness, not just in the frame, is another way pricier components save power.
    That said, if a ProTour team kitted you out with one of their bikes, they still aren't going to ask you to ride in the Tour de France with them.
    Motivation is far more important. If you can motivate yourself to ride the heavier bike then it can work for you perfectly well. If you can't motivate yourself to ride the lighter bike that bit further, it won't gain you anything.
  • suzyb
    suzyb Posts: 3,449
    cjcp wrote:
    suzyb wrote:
    Surely you can enjoy the ride on a heavier bike. You may not be able to go as fast and it will be harder going uphill but it can still be enjoyable.

    What sort of "heavy bike" are you considering? One way of getting fitter by making things harder would be to buy a turbo trainer and increase the resistance.
    I've already got one, a Claud Butler hybrid :wink:
    Whippet
  • whyamihere
    whyamihere Posts: 7,714
    Tonymufc wrote:
    Why? I was thinking the exact opposite. Surely if you can push that heavy bike at 20mph then when you jump on the summer machine it won't require the same amount of power to acheive that speed.
    That would apply if strength mattered in road cycling. It doesn't. Anyone without completely weak legs can put out the same power as a pro tour cyclist. The difference is how long you can keep it up. What you can keep doing for 30 seconds, they can keep doing for minutes. A heavy bike would help with building strength, but you don't need any extra strength.

    Look how skinny the legs of pro climbers are. Like matchsticks. They don't have huge amounts of strength in them, but they can keep them moving with the strength they do have for a long time.
  • Tonymufc
    Tonymufc Posts: 1,016
    I don't understand how leg strength isn't needed for cycling. Several publications are banging on about strength training for cycling. Whats all that about then if strength isn't needed.
  • cjcp
    cjcp Posts: 13,345
    You need leg strength, but you also need the "engine" to power them and the ability to sustain the wattage. On the hills, power to weight ratio then becomes an issue.
    FCN 2-4.

    "What happens when the hammer goes down, kids?"
    "It stays down, Daddy."
    "Exactly."
  • roger_merriman
    roger_merriman Posts: 6,165
    My bikes are all rather heavy, the old roadie is late 20's bit of slog up hills but I suspect the limit is still I not the bike.

    road biking is more about heart and lungs than the amount of power you can lay down.

    ie a bust of power is no good need to maintain it.
  • Tonymufc
    Tonymufc Posts: 1,016
    Still non the wiser, but thanks for trying. :?
  • Eau Rouge
    Eau Rouge Posts: 1,118
    Bigger leg muscles will let you go faster, just look at the tree-trunks most sprinters have for thighs. They only help in short bursts though, such as a sprint or a track event. Once you start to drag the time of the effort out to tens of minutes, let alone hours, then your cardiovascular fitness is what becomes the main issue. If that lets you down you won't be able to move your leg muscles so it won't matter how big they are.
    If you have the same cv fitness as someone else, but bigger leg muscles, you'll probably be fast than them, but big leg muscles will not push you around a 100 mile sportive if you don't have the cv fitness levels to do it.
  • suzyb
    suzyb Posts: 3,449
    So what is riding a heavier bike more likely to increase. Or can different riding styles increase both.
    Whippet
  • whyamihere
    whyamihere Posts: 7,714
    edited February 2010
    Tonymufc wrote:
    I don't understand how leg strength isn't needed for cycling. Several publications are banging on about strength training for cycling. Whats all that about then if strength isn't needed.
    The cynic in me would suggest that because it seems likely that increased leg strength will make you faster, they'll be able to sell more magazines by talking about it...

    Leg strength determines the absolute number of watts you can put out. Over a short time, anyone can put out 1000 watts. In the first TT of last years Tour, Bradley Wiggins put out a maximum of 989 watts (link). So you don't need any more absolute power.

    What matters for going fast on a bike is FTP, functional threshold power. This is the maximum average power you can hold for an hour. As a power to weight ratio, pro riders will generally be around 5.5-6 watts per kilogram body mass for this. So, a 70kg rider with an FTP of 5.5 watts per kg would be putting out 385 watts for an hour. Far, far lower than the absolute power that they can put out, far far lower than the absolute power that YOU can put out. Good amateurs will be around 4-5 watts per kilogram.

    Of course, for a short event, absolute power becomes more important. In a team sprint on the track, Chris Hoy will be going full beans for about 10 seconds. He needs maximum power for those 10 seconds, so he has legs like tree trunks. Andy Schleck would be whipped by Hoy in that situation. But over even 20 miles, Hoy would be nowhere compared to Schleck.
  • whyamihere
    whyamihere Posts: 7,714
    suzyb wrote:
    So what is riding a heavier bike more likely to increase. Or can different riding styles increase both.
    A heavier bike will increase your time from A-B, and possibly your bank balance compared to if you'd splashed out on a lighter bike. No performance gains.
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,375
    suzyb wrote:
    So what is riding a heavier bike more likely to increase.

    Your FCN

    It also mean that you have a dream, the dream that if only you had a carbon racing machine you would fly along like a pro. There is an entire industry built on this hope. (see also golf)

    Buying a carbon fibre racing machine snuffs this dream out, until you realise that there is always titanium
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • Bugly
    Bugly Posts: 520
    suzyb wrote:
    Reading geordiefella thread about his year of commuting got me thinking.

    Is it better to start on a heavier bike than a light roadie. If your unfit would cycling on a heavy hybrid or BSO not be better for building your fitness than a really light road bike.

    Heavy bikes are not that much fun to ride - to me they feel dead and unresponsive. They also tend to have poor quality components that tend not to work as well as those you find on a better lighter bike.

    You can ride either and if the miles are low and slow then a heavy bike will be fine. However in my experience a nice light bike is more fun to ride, you like it more (shallow I know) and thus you are more likely to ride it.
  • Tonymufc
    Tonymufc Posts: 1,016
    whyamihere wrote:
    Tonymufc wrote:
    I don't understand how leg strength isn't needed for cycling. Several publications are banging on about strength training for cycling. Whats all that about then if strength isn't needed.
    The cynic in me would suggest that because it seems likely that increased leg strength will make you faster, they'll be able to sell more magazines by talking about it...

    Leg strength determines the absolute number of watts you can put out. Over a short time, anyone can put out 1000 watts. In the first TT of last years Tour, Bradley Wiggins put out a maximum of 989 watts (link). So you don't need any more absolute power.

    What matters for going fast on a bike is FTP, functional threshold power. This is the maximum average power you can hold for an hour. As a power to weight ratio, pro riders will generally be around 5.5-6 watts per kilogram body mass for this. So, a 70kg rider with an FTP of 5.5 watts per kg would be putting out 385 watts for an hour. Far, far lower than the absolute power that they can put out, far far lower than the absolute power that YOU can put out. Good amateurs will be around 4-5 watts per kilogram.

    Of course, for a short event, absolute power becomes more important. In a team sprint on the track, Chris Hoy will be going full beans for about 10 seconds. He needs maximum power for those 10 seconds, so he has legs like tree trunks. Andy Schleck would be whipped by Hoy in that situation. But over even 20 miles, Hoy would be nowhere compared to Schleck.

    Thanks for taking the time out to explain it. Its starting to sink in. From the angle that I was looking at it from I just couldn't get my head around it.
  • suzyb
    suzyb Posts: 3,449
    Bugly wrote:
    Heavy bikes are not that much fun to ride - to me they feel dead and unresponsive. They also tend to have poor quality components that tend not to work as well as those you find on a better lighter bike.

    You can ride either and if the miles are low and slow then a heavy bike will be fine. However in my experience a nice light bike is more fun to ride, you like it more (shallow I know) and thus you are more likely to ride it.
    Since I've never ridden a lighter bike I'll probably end up agreeing with you and the others who think they are more fun to ride should I ever ride one.
    WheezyMcChubby wrote:
    It also mean that you have a dream, the dream that if only you had a carbon racing machine you would fly along like a pro. There is an entire industry built on this hope. (see also golf)
    Flying up the hills drol.gif
    Whippet

Categories