Bike recommendation maintenance costs low

danielsbrewer

Another post from me, I'm afraid. I have started to toy with the idea of investing in a new bike for my 6mile commute to work (6 miles each way). So here is what I am after:

1) ~£300-£500
2) Cheap to maintain i.e. components that are sturdy and do not wear out quickly
3) Cope with my commute which is about half road, a quarter alley way and a quarter bridal way (mud and gravel mix, just redone by the council, not too bumpy). Pretty hilly. 6 miles each way
4) Be able to fit a rack and panniers
5) Cope with the occasional use of a child seat and toddler
6) I am a pretty hefty chap at 15 stone

Even though I would like a bike that has long lasting components, components that are cheap to replace and is fast, I doubt that bike exists. I am more concerned with sturdy components that last than a super fast bike, but I wouldn't want to take into the extreme of a Dutch bike/tank.

I currently ride a specialized hybrid 2007, but I am wondering whether it has reached the stage where the repair costs are not worth it (and the frame is slightly bent at the rear).

Any ideas?

neiltb

I would be tempted to MTB territory, the less suspension the better (can you get a low end rigid that's not a BSO?). The cheap/durable component is really an either or but deore is cheap if stuff wears out and is good quality.

To me it would be a hard tail with a 1/2 way decent fork (or rigid), make sure it has fittings for rack etc, might be tepted by v-brakes on a maintenance side of things and as good a spec as you can get.

danielsbrewer

Thanks for that. I'd probably prefer 700cc wheels, but I am open to opinions.

ndru

Go for a town bike - you can get a really good one second hand - no maintenance thanks to hub gears, drum brakes and chaincase - you'll especially appreciate it on the mud). I would go for Pashley Roadster or some kind of double tube transporter. You will also like the rack alread installed and able to carry panniers and a comfortable upright position.

AndyOgy

I got myself one of these:

http://www.rutlandcycling.com/17873/Kon ... -Bike.html

Very strong frame and way under budget. Used mine in all weathers and it's been great.

danielsbrewer

So I still unsure about what to do but here is a bit of a shortlist:
1) Kona Jake 2010 - £529.99 (Seems like an absolute bargin)
2) Specialized Sirrus 2009 £270
3) Sirrus Sport 2009 or 2010, £360 or £400 (Not sure on the differences to Sirrus)
4) Dawes spotif comp 2010 £490
5) Kona Smoke £200

So basically there are three categories, a cyclocross bike, flatbar hybrids with racing type frames and a touring bike. Has anyone got any opinions about these possibilities? I am really having trouble seeing the wood from the trees.

I have never used non-flatbar bikes before but am willing to give them ago, the question is are they suitable if you have got a child on the back?

Many thanks

Berk Bonebonce

26" offers clear benefits over 700c/hybrid at recreational/commuter speeds. Better rolling, greater comfort, lower centre of gravity, for three.

Get a cheap bike - replacement parts are cheaper.

Got a rigid aluminium mountain bike a while ago for 300 something quid. Fitted Schwalbe Big Apple 2.0, Tubus rear carrier, SKS full length mudguards. Verrl pleased with it.

lae

^ better rolling, greater comfort and lower centre of gravity with 26" wheels? I'd argue against all three of these!

Firstly large wheels DO roll better especially over obstacles. The angle of approach is smaller. Imagine a tennis ball trying to roll up a curb - now imagine a basketball doing the same thing. It's obviously much easier for the basketball. Same principle works with wheels.

I don't think wheel size has a particularly noticeable effect on comfort, but considering that smaller wheels tend to be stiffer, it would make sense that larger 700c wheels are more flexible and provide greater comfort. Any disparity here is almost certainly down to tyre size - just fit wide tyres to 700c to solve it.

And lower centre of gravity... I don't really know what you're saying. Yeah it has a lower centre of gravity, but that won't make the bicycle more stable. It might make it easier to handle the bike by hand and being slightly lower might make it easier to lift a child onto the child seat. Seeing as it's not a racing bike then cornering ability isn't going to be anywhere near as important as stability - on the move, a bicycle (or motorbike, for that matter) with a higher centre of gravity is more stable. Read Bicycling Science for an explanation of the physics behind it. Basically it works in the same way that balancing a broom vertically on your fingertip does - the higher the broom end is, the easier it is to balance it, because the correcting movements needed to keep it upright are smaller.


Anyway


I was gonna suggest the Kona Smoke too. For £200ish it's an absolute steal - if I didn't already have too many bikes I'd definitely get one. Very good quality steel frame which will last forever, has all the right eyelets, and half-decent branded components, and it comes with mudguards already fitted (saves £20 which is quite a large proportion of a commuter bike's budget)

Being in a hilly area rules out singlespeed, which is a shame because it's the lowest maintenance possible (apart from belt drive or shaft drive which are both rare and expensive). A hub-geared system would probably be best for you. Revolution (aka Edinburgh Cycle Co-operative) did a Courier model with a 7-speed Nexus hub, but I think it might have gone out of production.

The Pashleys, as some people have suggested, are really absolutely bulletproof. They have hub gears and a chaincase which will mean your transmission is very low maintenance indeed, plus the hub brakes are completely sealed from the weather and hardly ever need servicing. The Brooks saddle will need a bit of leather care product every few months but that's about it!

mrwibble

How tall are you?