Winter bikes

thescouselander

Something has been confusing me somewhat. Many people seem to be swapping their usual bikes for lower spec "winter" bikes. Surely this is the opposite of what you should do. Cheaper bikes will be made of materials that will be affected badly by winter conditions - eg steel will rust quickly

Surly the strategy should be to buy a more expensive bike for winter that will be made of better materials that will me more immune to the effects of corrosion.

marcusjb

It's not just the frame that's the issue. The grit and muck of winter will eat everything - chains last far less km, drivetrain in general, rims, brake-blocks - everything will get a real hammering, even if you keep it clean etc.

So riding a bike with a lower-spec groupset, wheels etc. can make a lot of sense. The frame material isn't overly important (though you are right in saying steel can corrode quicker, but aluminium is not a fan of salt either). Ti or soot would make sense, but that's going to be an expensive winter bike as you say.

Many people will ride fixed over the winter - as you eliminate many of the issues of wearing through drivetrains with big sturdy chains and far fewer moving parts etc.

pottssteve

What Marcus said. Also, winter bikes will often have mudguards that we fashionistas don't want on our summer bikes. Winter bikes tend to be a bit heavier as a result of all the "extras" and the lower spec. wheels etc. That's OK in the winter because you might not be riding so far.

Steve

John.T

Winter bikes are also where the bits you took off the best one when you upgraded it go to die. My winter bike is a Ribble Winter/Audax frame with nearly all the rest cast offs from other bikes. Plus mudguards with a long flap to protect the rider behind.

Wirral_paul

Probably fair to say you're more likely to have a few mishaps too. Crashing on expensive bars and carbon ergo levers hurts a lot more than losing a bit of skin.

As said ^^^ winter grit will eat chains and sprockets - it acts as an abrasive so regardless of the quality, its going to wear parts out. Pointless killing a £40 chain or £100 cassette so its generally the summer bike hand-me-downs or lower spec parts that we all fit. I would always stick to standard replacement limits though - ie chains should be measured for stretch and binned at 0.75%. Better to fit a new £10 chain than a worn out £40 one

jgsi

thescouselander wrote:

Something has been confusing me somewhat. Many people seem to be swapping their usual bikes for lower spec "winter" bikes. Surely this is the opposite of what you should do. Cheaper bikes will be made of materials that will be affected badly by winter conditions - eg steel will rust quickly

Surly the strategy should be to buy a more expensive bike for winter that will be made of better materials that will me more immune to the effects of corrosion.

er, steel and cheaper do not necessarily go hand in hand please.... price up a frame in 953 .........
rust!? :shock:

DavidJB

As others have said tis cheaper to replace parts.

I ride a tiagra equipped bike in the winter as its a damn lot cheaper to replace that than ultegra parts!

I quite like riding my winter bike because I don't give a poo about it so I thrash it about...its pretty hardy And like a fat lass it tries hard because it's grateful for the ride

thescouselander

Well I ride my main bike all year round. Maybe its because its not that expensive but even if I did have a more expensive bike I'd probably ride that all year round too. I've never really noticed any excessive chain or sprocket wear - it always seems to be bolts, screws and cables that suffer.

rolf_f

thescouselander wrote:

Something has been confusing me somewhat. Many people seem to be swapping their usual bikes for lower spec "winter" bikes. Surely this is the opposite of what you should do. Cheaper bikes will be made of materials that will be affected badly by winter conditions - eg steel will rust quickly

What people generally mean are less expensive bikes rather than cheap bikes. The durability of such bikes is no less than that of more expensive bikes (often the reverse as heavier components are often tougher).

centimani

There can be subtle differences in many peoples winter bikes as opposed to best bikes, most of them for a reason.

I commute all winter (well i did anyway), snow, salt, rain, frost, whatever. The transmission gets absolutely filthy in two days commuting when its wet and salty. For that reason i prefer 8 speed rather than 10. 8 speed componentry tends to last longer, being heavier and more durable...and its cheaper to buy/replace.
Most will have 23mm tyres on in summer, you'll see many have 25s in winter, a bit more contact area for those slippery/wet days.
Contrary to popular belief, aluminium frames do corrode if there are any chips in the paintwork. Steel is a better material IMO. My 531 commuter gets used all winter but hasnt really suffered. I used my best alloy bike for one winter and not in the worst conditions, the salt found every chip of paint and white furry corrosion was the result.

A heavier winter bike has another plus, you'll perhaps tend to do less mileage in winter, a heavier bike makes you work that bit harder, no bad thing.

As mentioned above...i had two falls in ice last year (ironically my first in years)...on a winter bike you tend to just shrug it off as battle scars, i wouldnt want that damage on my best bike.

Monty Dog

IME the best winter bike is a titanium frame with hand-me-down parts. A decent quality 5-year-old transmission will last way better than buying new cheap stuff because they use better quality materials, bearings and finishes. Having 6 bikes also means that there's generally a clean one in the garage at some point. My race-bike won't get used again until the Spring unless we get one of those really dry, crisp winter days.