Decent Hybrid - advice please

[Saint]

Hi

I already have a Scott Roadster S1 which satisfies my need for speed
but want something a bit less sporty to either bimble around
on/fitness and slightly more leisurely rides with a higher degree of
comfort.

A good mate of mine has a hybrid which, it appears, would satisfy that
(its a Dawes Doscovery 401) but I am unsure which to buy. Having
trawled the archives before posting it appers that the Discovery range
get good reviews but the 401 (having front suspension which I don't
really want) are a little heavy weighing in at around 28lbs.

Question is a very open one therefore - can anyone recommend a good,
general purpose as described above hybrid? Budget is about 400 (500
at an absolute stretch). Would appreciate views on the Discovery
range plus also stuff like Ridgeback and Specialized - in addition to
others considered meritworthy.

Thanks

S

[Doki]

Saint wrote:
> Hi
>
> I already have a Scott Roadster S1 which satisfies my need for speed
> but want something a bit less sporty to either bimble around
> on/fitness and slightly more leisurely rides with a higher degree of
> comfort.
>
> A good mate of mine has a hybrid which, it appears, would satisfy that
> (its a Dawes Doscovery 401) but I am unsure which to buy. Having
> trawled the archives before posting it appers that the Discovery range
> get good reviews but the 401 (having front suspension which I don't
> really want) are a little heavy weighing in at around 28lbs.
>
> Question is a very open one therefore - can anyone recommend a good,
> general purpose as described above hybrid? Budget is about 400 (500
> at an absolute stretch). Would appreciate views on the Discovery
> range plus also stuff like Ridgeback and Specialized - in addition to
> others considered meritworthy.

A friend has a Ridgeback £200 quidder, more town bike than hybrid. It weighs
a bit more than my Giant hardtail, has 7 gears instead of 28, but compared
to my Giant on semi slicks, it climbs like mad. Part of it must be down to
the lower rolling resistance of the tyres on the Ridgeback, but the lack of
suspension forks IMO makes a big difference.

[Peter Tillotson]

I have a Dawes 301 from a couple of years back. I bought it for cycle
touring / camping. Now the bike has going on 1600 miles on it and
running fine.

The bigest problem is the straight handle bars, but bar ends sort that
for £15, and its worth canging the saddles at least on the range 2 years
back.

All round it is a good strong bike. I didn't fancy suspension, but i've
not really riden a bike with it so don't know what i'm missing.

Gearing is fine, but if anything the frame is a bit on the heavy side.

cheers

p

Saint wrote:
> Hi
>
> I already have a Scott Roadster S1 which satisfies my need for speed
> but want something a bit less sporty to either bimble around
> on/fitness and slightly more leisurely rides with a higher degree of
> comfort.
>
> A good mate of mine has a hybrid which, it appears, would satisfy that
> (its a Dawes Doscovery 401) but I am unsure which to buy. Having
> trawled the archives before posting it appers that the Discovery range
> get good reviews but the 401 (having front suspension which I don't
> really want) are a little heavy weighing in at around 28lbs.
>
> Question is a very open one therefore - can anyone recommend a good,
> general purpose as described above hybrid? Budget is about 400 (500
> at an absolute stretch). Would appreciate views on the Discovery
> range plus also stuff like Ridgeback and Specialized - in addition to
> others considered meritworthy.
>
> Thanks
>
> S

[Dominic Sansom]

The Specialized Sirrus range is GREAT! You should be able to find one
within your budget. I used to have a Sirrus Sport (approx £500) and it
was fast, light and comfortable.

Great value for money.



--

[Fat Lad]

I'm very happy with my Marin Kentfield. Paid £300 in March this year
with rack & 'puter thrown in. Only done about 250 contry lane commuter
miles on it but it is still crisp. Sort of reasonably comfy but I am
going down the harder saddle route to try and stop numbing. I have no
experience of other hybrids but this does what it is supposed to and is
still fun.

======================

19:45 roads will be still....



--

[wheelsgoround]

Saint wrote:
> Hi
> I already have a Scott Roadster S1 which satisfies my need for speed but
> want something a bit less sporty to either bimble around on/fitness and
> slightly more leisurely rides with a higher degree of comfort.
> A good mate of mine has a hybrid which, it appears, would satisfy that
> (its a Dawes Doscovery 401) but I am unsure which to buy. Having trawled
> the archives before posting it appers that the Discovery range get good
> reviews but the 401 (having front suspension which I don't really want)
> are a little heavy weighing in at around 28lbs.
> Question is a very open one therefore - can anyone recommend a good,
> general purpose as described above hybrid? Budget is about 400 (500 at
> an absolute stretch). Would appreciate views on the Discovery range plus
> also stuff like Ridgeback and Specialized - in addition to others
> considered meritworthy.
> Thanks
> S



I think we need to look a bit more closely at what your needs are before
deciding what type of bike would suit.

"Hybrid" means different things to different people but the usual
definition is:
- Road Frame
- 700c Wheels (but wide-ish with fatter tyres)
- Straight Bars & corresponding levers/shifters
- Triple Chainset + Wide Range on Cassette/Freewheel

If I have got you right, you want something for road use, not built for
speed but still fairly light and comfortable for longer rides.

Looking at each of the points in the hybrid spec:
- Road Frame - if you're not going off-road, this is what you want
- 700c wheels - these are really built for speed, including "fast-
touring" or audax. If speed is not important to you, consider 26in
wheels; they will be stronger and more reliable. They don't have to
have big fat tyres.
- Straight bars + shifters etc. This is a matter of personal choice but
drop bars do give more riding positions. Straight bars offer limited
riding positions (although you could fit bar-ends) and so on long
rides may turn out to be less comfortable.
- Wide gears - what do you want all them for? That said, most Audax
bikes come with triple chainsets.

If you can have a think about that lot and them come back, we should be
able to home in on the right kind of bike.

Ian



--

[Peter Clinch]

wheelsgoround wrote:

> "Hybrid" means different things to different people but the usual
> definition is:
> - Road Frame

I wonder how many people could tell the difference between a "road
frame" and an "MTB frame" where used to trundle about town. If you're
using them in performance places, maybe, but for trundling about town I
suspect there's rather less difference than a lot of people might think.
After all, one of the great things about the diamond frame is its
flexibility in a variety or roles.

> - 700c Wheels (but wide-ish with fatter tyres)

Quite a lot have 26"

> - Straight Bars & corresponding levers/shifters
> - Triple Chainset + Wide Range on Cassette/Freewheel

I think there are increasingly more with hub gears as time goes by.
ICBW and have no hard data but my impression is that as time marches on
the many more of the UK bike buying public are finally coming to realise
that sporty looks and cool sounding specs are not necessarily the same
as most fit for utilitarian purpose.

> Looking at each of the points in the hybrid spec:
> - Road Frame - if you're not going off-road, this is what you want

see above

> - 700c wheels - these are really built for speed, including "fast-
> touring" or audax. If speed is not important to you, consider 26in
> wheels; they will be stronger and more reliable. They don't have to
> have big fat tyres.

A bit like the frame, I don't think this will make nearly as much
difference as a lot of people like to think. Yes, all else being equal
700c will have slightly lower rolling resistance, but frankly you'll
make far, far, far more difference with choice of tyres. Note that
Moultons have set speed records "despite" their wee wheels.
A few years ago I'd have been loathe to consider a machine for the road
without 700c wheels, but after some actual experience of smaller wheels
I'm reasonably convinced that sales of 700c owe more to perception than
reality. 26" aren't much slower, especially if you put on fast tyres
like Stelvios, but they are stronger and suit a greater range of rider
sizes. If I bought an upright diamond frame for utility trundling now
I'd take 26" wheels rather than 700c if all else was equal, and with the
right tyres I wouldn't get left behind on it if I wanted to put my foot
down.

> - Straight bars + shifters etc. This is a matter of personal choice but
> drop bars do give more riding positions. Straight bars offer limited
> riding positions (although you could fit bar-ends) and so on long
> rides may turn out to be less comfortable.

This is true, but OTOH drop bars do take some getting used to and the
"more positions" thing only becomes relevant on fairly long rides,
especially if you've got a more upright position with more weight on the
saddle rather than on the bars. Like 700c wheels, I wouldn't ride on
roads on anything but drops for years. More recent practical experience
of actually riding flat bars for utility jobs have enlightened me that I
was being a bit precious about my personal definition of a "proper bike".

> - Wide gears - what do you want all them for? That said, most Audax
> bikes come with triple chainsets.

On a utility hack hub gears might make a lot more sense than a
derailleur. It's less about sheer number of gears than are the ones
you've got the right ones. I have 3 on my urban hack bike ranging from
quite low to moderate. It's easy to spin out down hills but trundling
round town I'm happy to let gravity do the work, and 3 is enough even
though Dundee comes fitted with wide ranging hills as standard...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

[Roos Eisma]

>wheelsgoround wrote:

>> Looking at each of the points in the hybrid spec:
>> - Road Frame - if you're not going off-road, this is what you want

For me the distinction between on-road and off-road is more fuzzy than
most people here seem to take it.
I have used my hybrid mainly for hacks in and around Amsterdam, but that
included usually a fair amount of poorly paved surfaces: roadworks with
temporary bricks layed out, tarmac cycle path with tree roots growing
under it, road with uneven concrete slabs, snow and slush in winter, the
odd driveway to a farmhouse.
And on holidays we tended to stay on the roads but some of these were
rather bumpy (especially when foreign maps had different ideas about what
a "road" is supposed to mean - anything driveable by a tractor in some
cases)

And currently: I don't consider myself to be cycling off-road but the lane
to our house is steeper and bumpier than the sort of off-road most people
do in Tentsmuir forest...

Roos

[Saint]

<snip>
>
>I think we need to look a bit more closely at what your needs are before
>deciding what type of bike would suit.

OK - I appreciate the help.
>
>"Hybrid" means different things to different people but the usual
>definition is:
> - Road Frame
> - 700c Wheels (but wide-ish with fatter tyres)
> - Straight Bars & corresponding levers/shifters
> - Triple Chainset + Wide Range on Cassette/Freewheel
>
>If I have got you right, you want something for road use, not built for
>speed but still fairly light and comfortable for longer rides.

Yes as long as it's not an old tug which weighs a ton. I don't want
to race or set any speed records - this is not its purpose and aI
already have a road bike in the Scott for that. I want to use this
for slower, maybe longer rides. This may include terrain like canal
paths and the like but not off road in the MTB sense.
>
>Looking at each of the points in the hybrid spec:
> - Road Frame - if you're not going off-road, this is what you want

See above - off road-ish would be more appropriate.

> - 700c wheels - these are really built for speed, including "fast-
> touring" or audax. If speed is not important to you, consider 26in
> wheels; they will be stronger and more reliable. They don't have to
> have big fat tyres.
> - Straight bars + shifters etc. This is a matter of personal choice but
> drop bars do give more riding positions. Straight bars offer limited
> riding positions (although you could fit bar-ends) and so on long
> rides may turn out to be less comfortable.

Yes I want straight bars - definitely not drops. My Scott has
straight ones and I have bar ends fitted and am comfortable with that
positon and set up.

> - Wide gears - what do you want all them for? That said, most Audax
> bikes come with triple chainsets.

I want a triple as where I live can be quite hilly and I am a lazy
bugger. ;-)
>
>If you can have a think about that lot and them come back, we should be
>able to home in on the right kind of bike.
>
> Ian


Thanks in advance for your help.

[Saint]

On 21 Jun 2004 13:36:13 GMT, Roos Eisma > wrote:

>>wheelsgoround wrote:
>
>>> Looking at each of the points in the hybrid spec:
>>> - Road Frame - if you're not going off-road, this is what you want
>
>For me the distinction between on-road and off-road is more fuzzy than
>most people here seem to take it.
>I have used my hybrid mainly for hacks in and around Amsterdam, but that
>included usually a fair amount of poorly paved surfaces: roadworks with
>temporary bricks layed out, tarmac cycle path with tree roots growing
>under it, road with uneven concrete slabs, snow and slush in winter, the
>odd driveway to a farmhouse.
>And on holidays we tended to stay on the roads but some of these were
>rather bumpy (especially when foreign maps had different ideas about what
>a "road" is supposed to mean - anything driveable by a tractor in some
>cases)
>
>And currently: I don't consider myself to be cycling off-road but the lane
>to our house is steeper and bumpier than the sort of off-road most people
>do in Tentsmuir forest...
>
>Roos


Together with general roads near where I live your above description
summarises nicely what I mean when I try to describe what I want a
second bike for. Definitely not off raoding in the MTB sense but to
go to places I wouldn't ever ever take my Scott.

I hope I am making sense.

On another note I went to speak to my LBS today as I understood they
stock Ridgeback Hybrids which I have been advised to consider. They
have just stopped doing them and now only do the Dawes Discovery range
of hybrid. They look nice too but I genuinely do not know anything
about them.

Funny thing was how less friendly the LBS People became when I said I
may have to go elsewhere if I plump for a RIdgeback.

Cheers

S

[wheelsgoround]

Pete C and Roos make some good points especially about the distinction
between road frames and off-road frames.

Aside from the shape/size of the tubing and the "chunkiness" of the
frame (road frames can be pretty chunky these days) the main
characteristic of the MTB frame is the high bottom bracket and
resulting reduced seat tube length. This is fine if you are hopping
over boulders and logs but not necessary for the high street or cycle
paths & canal towpaths.

Saint, it seems like the spec we have so far is:
- 26in wheels
- Triple Chainset (or hub gears with v. wide range - pricey)
- Straight Bars
- Frame - open-minded
- Mudguards ? I would recommend them
- Luggage Rack ? Adds versatility

Dawes Discovery range does look OK. 501 is within your budget, doesn't
have suspension but doesn't come with mudguards & luggage rack fitted
although that is easily rectified

Comments anyone?



--

[Saint]

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 19:51:43 GMT, wheelsgoround
> wrote:

>Pete C and Roos make some good points especially about the distinction
>between road frames and off-road frames.
>
>Aside from the shape/size of the tubing and the "chunkiness" of the
>frame (road frames can be pretty chunky these days) the main
>characteristic of the MTB frame is the high bottom bracket and
>resulting reduced seat tube length. This is fine if you are hopping
>over boulders and logs but not necessary for the high street or cycle
>paths & canal towpaths.
>
>Saint, it seems like the spec we have so far is:
> - 26in wheels
> - Triple Chainset (or hub gears with v. wide range - pricey)
> - Straight Bars
> - Frame - open-minded
> - Mudguards ? I would recommend them
> - Luggage Rack ? Adds versatility
>
>Dawes Discovery range does look OK. 501 is within your budget, doesn't
>have suspension but doesn't come with mudguards & luggage rack fitted
>although that is easily rectified
>
>Comments anyone?

That's one of the ones I have been looking at and, for the intended
purpose, it looks like a nice bike although the 601 looks slightly
better given it's Deore mechs and lighter frame.

I'd really welcome comments from Discovery riders and also Ridgeback
Rapide series riders to get a feel for the VFM of the bikes.

Thanks to all for help so far.

Saint

[Patrick]

Saint wrote:
<snip>
> Would appreciate views on the Discovery
> range plus also stuff like Ridgeback and Specialized - in addition to
> others considered meritworthy.
>
> Thanks
>
> S

I am no expert, but I recently got back into the saddle after a 15 year
absence. I got a Ridgeback hybrid-type of bike - the Rapide Velocity
(http://tinyurl.com/38tbk). I have not really taken it out much due to the
arrival of sonandheir, but have found it very pleasant indeed.

HTH,

Patrick

--
Patrick Mullin,

Email <first name> at AuroraDigitalis dot com

[Simon Brooke]

in message >, wheelsgoround
') wrote:

> Pete C and Roos make some good points especially about the distinction
> between road frames and off-road frames.
>
> Aside from the shape/size of the tubing and the "chunkiness" of the
> frame (road frames can be pretty chunky these days) the main
> characteristic of the MTB frame is the high bottom bracket and
> resulting reduced seat tube length. This is fine if you are hopping
> over boulders and logs but not necessary for the high street or cycle
> paths & canal towpaths.
>
> Saint, it seems like the spec we have so far is:
> - 26in wheels
> - Triple Chainset (or hub gears with v. wide range - pricey)
> - Straight Bars
> - Frame - open-minded
> - Mudguards ? I would recommend them
> - Luggage Rack ? Adds versatility
>
> Dawes Discovery range does look OK. 501 is within your budget, doesn't
> have suspension but doesn't come with mudguards & luggage rack fitted
> although that is easily rectified

Look at the Edinburgh Bicycle Co-op's Revolution Courier. It's worth
considering and excellent value for money.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; Our modern industrial economy takes a mountain covered with trees,
;; lakes, running streams and transforms it into a mountain of junk,
;; garbage, slime pits, and debris. -- Edward Abbey

[Peter Clinch]

Saint wrote:

> I want a triple as where I live can be quite hilly and I am a lazy
> bugger. ;-)

That applies to me too. My tourer does have a triple but my freight
bike has no front changer and an 8 speed rear and can lug 50 Kg of coal
up fair sized hills, and my folder has a 3 speed hub and still gets me
round a hilly town.
If you're not in a hurry (and it seems you're not) then as long as the
bottom gear is low enough then a 1 x 8 or a hub gear costs less (or
effectively means you spend the money on more useful things) and
requires less maintenance both for gears and chain.

Another possibility to consider would be the SRAM Dualdrive, which has a
rear derailleur mounted on a three speed hub so you get the same sort of
range as a front triple but you can change the hub when you're still
(useful at lights and junctions) and have the maintenance advantages of
a hub. Slightly less efficient, I'm guessing, but I think it would suit
a trundler /much/ better than a triple front derailleur. Roos has one
on her serious new tourer and has expressed no regrets as yet.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

[Tim Hall]

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 09:16:19 +0100, Peter Clinch
> wrote:


>
>Another possibility to consider would be the SRAM Dualdrive, which has a
>rear derailleur mounted on a three speed hub so you get the same sort of
> range as a front triple but you can change the hub when you're still
>(useful at lights and junctions) and have the maintenance advantages of
>a hub. Slightly less efficient, I'm guessing, but I think it would suit
>a trundler /much/ better than a triple front derailleur. Roos has one
>on her serious new tourer and has expressed no regrets as yet.
>

Another benefit is that you get to use all the gears - no worrying
about big-big or small-small chain line problems.


Tim
--
For those who have trouble distinguishing, cynicsm, sarcasm, humour etc,
try mentally inserting smilies thoughout my post until it either
matches what you'd like to read, or what you'd expect me to write.

(Jon Senior urc)