Frameset or Complete Bike?

In the comments of the previous post, a reader pointed out that the comparatively low MSRP of the frameset I described was not such a bargain, considering the likely cost of the complete build. Depending on the context, I both agree and disagree. So I'll take this opportunity to discuss the benefits, as I see them, of buying a frameset and building it up yourself vs buying a complete bicycle.

Purchasing a complete bike

When a manufacturer releases a bicycle model as a complete build, the price of the bike bundles together a number of things: the frame and fork, the components and accessories, and the labor involved in assembly. The price of the bike will be significantly lower than if you were to pay for all of these things individually. Assuming that you are happy with the components included in the stock build, this makes the bike a great deal compared to buying a frameset only and starting from scratch. You save money on components, you save money on labor, and on top of that you get the immediate gratification of having a ready to ride bicycle straight away.

But keep in mind that the more changes you make, the less of a great deal it will be - especially if you cannot do the work yourself and will need to pay extra for labor. Give particular consideration to whether you are happy with the stock drivetrain and shifting system. Changing this on a stock build can be costly. If the stock bike comes with 700C wheels and you want 650B, a conversion could be pricey. If you want dynamo lighting and the bike does not already have it, you will need to rebuild the front wheel with a dynamo hub, or replace it. If the stem length and handlebar width are wrong for you, you will need new ones. At some point, it might be more cost-effective to start from scratch.

Purchasing a frameset

When a bicycle model is available as a frameset only, it is an opportunity to assemble the bike according to your needs from the start. You can choose the exact gearing you want, your preferred model of levers and brakes, the correct stem length and handlebar width, and a comfortable saddle. You can integrate dynamo lighting into the build from the get-go. In the event the frame is compatible with more than one wheel size, you can choose the wheel size that suits you, instead of executing an aftermarket conversion. Going the frameset-only route is an especially great deal for those who are DIY tinkerers (or live with one) and can do the work without the help of a bike shop, and for those who already have a bunch of components lying around waiting for a frame.

But before buying a frameset, it is a good idea to make sure the bike you want really is different from an available stock build. Oftentimes novice buyers cannot distinguish between what's a big deal to change and what isn't. For example, if a bike is missing fenders and racks, you can add them without making changes to the existing build, thereby still enjoying the savings of starting with a complete bike. Also, if it's a matter of stem length and seat post setback, some bike shops are willing to swap those at no extra cost. Finally, the stock models are usually set up generically - with plain handlebar tape, plastic pedals and unsightly reflectors. While this does not look as nice as a custom build, you can easily and inexpensively personalise the bike without needing to start from scratch.

One thing to add, is that a direct cost comparison between framesets and complete builds is not always possible. While some manufacturers offer both options, others offer only one or the other. The make and model you choose in the first place might depend on which you prefer. For heavy-duty city bikes, there are now plenty of complete stock models available that require few if any aftermarket alterations. Ditto for standard roadbikes. As for 650B mixtes, and other non-mainstream specimens, not so much.

Categories: bike shopping, DIY

Selling City Bikes: NYC Case Studies

While in New York City last week, I had a chance to visit two bicycle shops specialising in transportational cycling: Hudson Urban Bicycles (HUB) and Adeline Adeline. These visits were great, but they also evoked some envy. Why do we not have shops like this in Boston? Seriously, there is not a single bike shop in town catering specifically and exclusively to urban transport. A few shops do stock transportation bicycles, but the selection is limited. When I ask why they do not offer more I am told there is no demand. Baffling, because I know for a fact that both New York and Portland, ME (not to mention a number of online retailers) receive a steady stream of Boston customers because there is no local supply.

Based on my observations over the recent years, I do not think there is in fact a lack of demand. But it seems that bike shops that specialise in transportation may be in a better position to sell city bikes than bike shops that are diversified. Visiting Adeline and HUB in New York underscored this idea.

I would say that for shops selling transportation bicycles, location is key. Adeline Adeline is on a small and quiet street in TriBeCa. Hudson Urban Bicycles is on an equally small and quiet street in the West Village. In both cases, there are bike lanes literally just out the door, with protected greenways nearby. This sort of thing is absolutely crucial for beginners looking to test ride some bikes, which is precisely the category many potential customers fall into. They would like to ride in the city, but quite possibly they have never actually done so before. Their first cycling experience in ages might very well be this test ride outside of the bike shop. It makes a huge difference whether the space outside the shop is beginner-friendly. 

When I was shopping for my first bicycle in the Spring of 2009, I was not confident on a bike at all and could not yet imagine riding in traffic. I found it impossible to properly test ride a bike in almost any local shop, because the spaces outside were not beginner-friendly. While it's hard for established shops to change that reality, a new shop devoted specifically to city bikes can choose their space with access to infrastructure in mind.

Appropriately informed staff are important to selling transportation bicycles as well. In typical bike shops, most sales staff tend to be avid road cyclists, many of them racers. I have listened to quite a few steer customers by default toward cyclocross bikes with drop bars for commuting. I have also witnessed sales staff actively discourage customers from getting bikes with step-through frames or internally geared hubs, citing performance drawbacks. They did not even ask the customers how long their commute would be before saying such things.

While hanging out at HUB, I watched the owner talking to a couple who was new to cycling, and as they chatted I could see that couple grow more relaxed about the prospect of riding in the city. In shops that do not focus on transportation per se, I often observe the opposite happening: The longer a potential customer talks to a member of staff about commuting, the more concerned their facial expression grows. The "information" they are receiving is obviously scary and confusing. Bike shops that sell many types of bicycles cannot usually afford to hire separate sales staff to handle the city bikes. 

No less important is the atmosphere inside the shop. The interiors of Adeline and HUB are heavenly microcosms - worlds where transportation cycling is normal, cool, intuitive, safe, and has an obvious place in everyday life. And the creation of such an atmosphere is a huge public service as far as I am concerned. Even if the customer walks out the door without buying a bike, they will still walk away with the impression that transportation cycling is fun and, above all, normal. They will be more likely to come back, or at least to keep cycling in mind as a valid possibility. When city bikes are mixed together with all sorts of other types of bikes on one cluttered floor space, it is impossible to achieve this kind of ambiance; it is impossible to communicate this message. I do think it's possible for diversified bike shops to present transportation cycling in a similar light by designating a special area to them, and then staging this area as if it were its own boutique. But in actuality this is seldom done.

Several members of the bicycle industry have mentioned to me now that it is easier to start a dedicated city bike boutique in a town that already has a dozen bike shops than it is to get existing shops to carry city bikes. And I have seen plenty of evidence to support this. Aside from the issues already mentioned, existing bike shops tend to err on the conservative side and stick with what they know. Even if they delve into city bikes, they are not going to start carrying 5 new brands right away; they might start with one or two. But that might not be sufficient to be truly effective. Hopefully, some brave entrepreneurs will start transportation-specific bike shops in Boston soon, as well as in every other city that is ready for them.

In the meantime, I may just have to keep visiting NYC for test rides. During this visit alone I test rode  four bikes, and there were plenty of others to try. There were also other city bike stores to explore had I not run out of time, most notably Bicycle Habitat and Rolling Orange. For anyone visiting New York, I recommend having a look at those, in addition to Adeline Adeline and Hudson Urban Bicycles (HUB).

Aside from bicycles, Adeline specialises in exquisite accessories the likes of which you might not find elsewhere: the latest in bicycle bags, jewelry, books, unusual clothing. HUB on the other hand, boasts an entire show room of vintage bikes in refurbished condition, including loads of pre-1970s English 3-speeds - some with original lighting! I enjoyed visiting both shops, and will be posting reviews of the Achielle, Retrovelo and Jensen bicycles soon. 

Categories: bike shopping, local bike shops, NYC, transportation options, travel

Choosing a Transportation Bicycle? Some Ideas to Consider

Every spring I receive requests for advice on buying a transportation bicycle, and this year my inbox is filled with a stunning variety of very specific questions. I cannot possibly answer them all, so I've been thinking about how to address these types of questions more generally. The problem with the concept of a "transportation bike" is that it can mean pretty much anything, depending on our perspectives and criteria. And so I thought it might help to offer a questionnaire that those looking to buy a new bike can use for reference as they do their own research. In no particular order, I offer you the following questions for consideration:

1. How far will you be riding on a regular basis and how hilly is the route?
While a cushy upright 3-speed is great for shorter trips, for long and hilly commutes a lighter, more aggressive bicycle with derailleur gearing might be more appropriate. And for those who plan to to ride after dark through remote, rural areas, investing in a good lighting package is essential.

2. How do you plan to dress on the bike?
If you'd like to ride in your everyday clothing, your bicycle will need the appropriate features. Step-through and mixte frames are ideal for those who wear skirts and dresses on a regular basis. Fenders are a must to keep clothing clean. Many find chaincases and dressguards to be useful features as well.

3. What sorts of things will you need to carry with you?
Different bikes are designed to carry different amounts of weight, in different ways. Do you plan to carry only a light briefcase and an occasional bag of groceries? Your carpentry tools? Your children and pets? Bags of fertilizer and cement blocks? Heavy-duty loads require not only the appropriate racks, baskets, and child seat attachments, but also a heavier build and an accommodating geometry.

4. Where will the bike be stored, and will it require being carried up and down stairs?
For bicycles stored outside or in garages and sheds, weight and size are of limited importance: You can simply roll the bike out. On the other hand, storing a bike in your 2nd floor apartment means you will have to haul it up and down those stairs, making weight and size serious considerations. Furthermore, not all bicycles are durable enough to be stored outdoors, so if you plan to go that route the bicycle must be designed to withstand the elements.

5. Do you plan to ride the bike in the winter?

Not all bikes do well in winter conditions. Here is a post on useful features for a winter bike.

6. How much maintenance are you willing to perform?
The more complicated and delicate a bicycle is, the more maintenance it will require. Those who do not wish to do their own maintenance and do not live near a good bike shop should opt for simpler, lower-maintance bikes and tires with good puncture protection.

7. What is your skill level as a cyclist?
Not all cyclists pick up skills at the same rate; many struggle with balance and handling issues for years, yet still want to ride. Some bicycles feel more stable and easier for beginners to handle than others. This can make all the difference between whether those cyclists are comfortable riding in traffic.

8. What are your aesthetic preferences?
I strongly believe that there is a benefit to getting a bicycle that you love, that makes you smile. While aesthetic considerations should not override utility, owning a bicycle that you find "lovely" is bound to be more enjoyable.

9. What is your budget? 

When determining your budget for a transportation bicycle, I suggest focusing on the transportation and not on the bicycle aspect of that phrase. "How much can I afford to spend on a non-motorised vehicle?" is a good question to ask yourself. Then look for something in that price range, and prepare to be flexible. Transportation is important; don't undermine things like safe handling, good lighting and puncture-resistant tires just to save a few bucks. 

Hopefully these ideas are helpful, and any additional thoughts are welcome. Transportation cycling has transformed my life over the past three years and I hope it can do the same for others, regardless of what sort of bicycle works best for them in this role.

Categories: beginners, bike shopping

Roadbike Shopping Complexities

I've mentioned before that I've been shopping around for a road/racing bike since last May, and that I hoped to write about the process once I bought one. With Spring just around the corner, I am getting emails from readers who are going through the same ordeal and feeling lost, wondering whether I plan to post a guide of some sort. The quick answer is "no." I am sorry to disappoint, but I can offer no helpful advice on this topic at the moment.

Many roadbike shopping stories I hear or receive from readers are very similar to my own experience. It starts with a decision to buy a roadbike. Nothing unusual - a fast modern roadbike for paceline rides, group rides, and so on. So at first you're thinking "Well, since I don't necessarily want anything 'lovely,' this should be easy. There are bike shops filled with roadbikes and nothing but roadbikes after all." And optimistically you head to these bike shops... only to discover that there really aren't as many options as you thought. 

Most guides to buying a new roadbike will tell you that fit is the main thing, and that once you have that down everything else will fall into place. Okay. So I've been fitted by several different professionals now, with the consensus that I have fairly standard proportions for a woman of my height and that I require a road frame that is 52cm x 53cm or thereabouts. It is not difficult to find a stock roadbike with these dimensions, so in theory I should be all set. In practice however, there is much more to it. 

For one thing, there is the dreaded toe overlap. I do not want to spark a debate on this topic yet again, so let's just say that some cyclists dislike TCO and leave it at that. I happen to be one of those cyclists, and it is not easy to find a stock frame in a small size that does not have this issue. So even though the right frame size is easy enough to find, the right frame size with no TCO limits the pool of available bikes considerably.

But a much larger issue that tends to be glossed over in bike shops, is that roadbikes don't all handle the same and don't all have the same ride quality. These factors are important to me.  I would be miserable on a bike with a harsh ride or on a bike that I cannot control on turns. Realistically, I need to test-ride a roadbike for at least 20 miles on hilly terrain in order to determine whether I am comfortable with it - essentially, I need to simulate the sort of ride I would normally be doing on the bike. And that is usually not possible. 

Apparently many bike shops expect you to test ride a bicycle either in their parking lot or around the block. At most they expect a test ride to be a couple of miles. Taking a bike on an actual 20 mile ride? In my experience, only a handful of shops will allow this, and those shops tend to be high-end with expensive bikes. 

An additional problem for me personally, is that I cannot use Shimano STI levers - what the vast majority of demo roadbikes in the vast majority of bike shops are fitted with. There is something about the shape of Shimano STIs that my hands don't like, and I cannot safely brake on a bike with these levers. This limits me severely on the bikes I am able to test ride, even if I am allowed to take them on a long ride.

The problem of testing before buying is also what made me wary of going custom. Framebuilders are wonderful, but no matter how much you communicate there is no guarantee that the bike they make will feel and handle as you want it to. Very few framebuilders offer demo bikes, and most of us are not lucky enough to have acquaintances whose custom bikes we can try. A blind purchase of a custom roadframe seems risky to me - especially if you are relying on it for a particular date/event and do not already have a roadbike to fall back on if something goes wrong (or takes longer than expected).

Going semi-custom, building up a stock frame from scratch, or refurbishing a vintage frame with new components, similarly involve risking the unknown, albeit at a lesser cost.

So what solution am I proposing? Well that is just the thing, I am not. Ultimately everyone will need to find their own solution and for many that will involve trial and error. Not everyone is sensitive to a bike's ride quality and handling. Not everyone cares about things like toe overlap. Individual preferences and skill levels play into it a great deal. As does simple luck. Some get lucky and buy a roadbike they are comfortable with on their first try. And reading this, they will no doubt think I am overcomplicating things. But others will face one frustration after another, and may even give up roadcycling as a result of not finding a bike they are comfortable with. If you find yourself in that category, I can only encourage you to be patient and not give up. Try to identify the problems you are having with your current bike or with the bikes you are trying in stores. It may, after all, be something as simple as trying a different brand of levers you never realised existed.

Categories: bike shopping, roadcycling

On Bicycle Pricing and Its Discontents

At the moment there is an engaging dialogue going on about the cost of bicycles, which I believe many readers here will find informative: Last week Jan Heine of the Bicycle Quarterly published a post entitled Why Buy an Expensive Bicycle, in which he argues in favour of custom-built bicycles costing 5 times as much as mid-tier production bikes. In response, Kent Peterson of Kent's Bike Blog explained why he prefers inexpensive bicycles, presenting an almost diametrically opposite viewpoint. Together, I think these two posts and the reader comments that follow make for some truly thought-provoking reading, and I invite you to check them out.

Having read both posts, I find that my own opinion on this matter does not fit into the dichotomy of the debate. But I will try to explain it in my own way, without framing it as an "expensive vs inexpensive" issue.

Put simply, for me it is about the bicycle and, more importantly, about the cyclist's experience - not about the price. Bicycles are made for riding, and in order to ride them (and be inspired to ride more) the cyclist's experience must be positive. Not everyone is mechanically inclined and able to fix even minor issues when things start to go wrong. Not everyone's body can withstand poor (or even mediocre) ride quality. Finally, not everyone is inspired by a bicycle that is so crudely made and generic-looking as to be utterly without character. Now, we can criticise people for their lack of mechanical skills, their sensitivity to discomfort and their preoccupation with aesthetics. Or we can accept these traits and turn our attention to the bicycle itself - defining a "good" bicycle as one that will inspire people to ride. And by "people" I mean people as they are, with all their flaws and biased preferences and love of pretty things and mechanical ineptitudes.

Based on the huge amount of feedback I receive from readers who are either would-be cyclists or fledgling cyclists, I believe there are three characteristics a bicycle must have in order to attract those who are not already committed to cycling: (1) it has to work properly without a lot of fussing, (2) it has to feel comfy, and (3) it has to look nice. And it makes sense that a person of average financial means who desires to ride a bicycle, will naturally strive for the least expensive option that satisfies all three of these criteria.

And therein lies the first glitch.  Based, again, on the feedback I get from readers, it is quite challenging to find a bicycle nowadays that both satisfies all three of the criteria listed above, and costs what most first-time buyers consider to be a reasonable amount. When I quote the $500 figure as a first-time buyer's typical budget, I am by no means making fun of this figure or disparaging persons with such a budget. On the contrary, this was my budget as well when I first began shopping around for a transportation bike. Unfortunately, $500 or thereabouts is considered "low end" by the bicycle industry today. Sad as it is, if you walk into a bicycle store right now, $500 will afford you only the lowest quality bikes available. The salesperson may even tell you, holding back a laugh, that with such a budget shopping for a new bike will be difficult. It is what they told me in 2009.

Now let's get back to this fictional person who, on the one hand, wants a nice bike, but on the other hand is discovering how tough it is to find a bicycle that satisfies their requirements on a modest budget. At this stage they have a choice between two main options: (a) compromise on one or more of their criteria, or (b) increase their budget. Many choose the former option, which, granted, seems very reasonable. However, I kid you not that I now receive perhaps half a dozen emails a week from persons who are unhappy with their bikes and are not enjoying cycling as a result of a budget-driven compromise. The biggest complaint is that of frequent failures. The cyclist is not experienced enough to deal with them, and moreover does not want to deal with them. They also do not have time to constantly take the bike to the shop. The second biggest complaint is that of severe discomfort and poor ride quality. With all these problems, the bicycle does not get ridden very often and the cyclist begins to lose faith in cycling all together.

So you see, it is not the price I have a problem with. It is this outcome. By no means do I believe expensive bicycles to be better simply by virtue of costing more; that would be absurd. When a $500 bicycle becomes available that I believe to be reasonably well made, comfortable and attractive enough to make new cyclists happy, I gladly herald it here and post lots of sexy pictures. Unfortunately, I find few bicycles in this price range to be of good quality, and I refuse, absolutely refuse to promote manufacturers who churn out overpriced bike-shaped toys by giving them exposure here based on their "low" prices alone. If a person cannot afford a well-made new bike, I recommend buying used or vintage.

Now that I've finished that rant, the next question might be: So what is my idea of a high-quality new bike and what would it cost? Unfortunately, I have no definitive answers for you. Unlike Jan Heine, I do not believe that a $5,000+ custom bicycle is necessarily the solution. Customers are not always experienced and informed enough to truly know what they want, and builders make mistakes all the time. Also, the custom process takes forever and by far not everyone is willing to wait a year or more for a bike. Moreover, I agree with Kent that beyond a certain price point the anxiety over potential theft and damage may diminish a bicycle's utility.

The truth is that what constitutes a quality bicycle and a good value often depends on the person. It depends on their needs. It depends on their standards. It depends on the kind of riding they do, on their body's sensitivity, on their terrain, even on their climate. It depends on their level of mechanical skill. It is impossible to profess "the answer" that will be applicable to everyone.

In conclusion, my view is that it's not about pricing; we are way too focused on pricing. If you are serious about cycling, determine the criteria you are looking for first: What kind of bicycle makes you want to ride? Because that is what ultimately it is all about. Then find a way to buy that kind of bicycle, without compromising on those criteria. For some this may be doable at $500, for others it could be $5000, and most of us will fall somewhere in between. It does not matter to me how much a bicycle costs, as long as the owner loves it and wants to ride it all the time.

Categories: bicycle industry, bike shopping, social commentary

The Starter Bike

Judging by my own experience and by those reported by other fledgling transportation cyclists, the phenomenon of the Starter Bike is fairly common. The Starter Bike gets acquired when the cyclist is just starting out, and is then replaced - usually between a couple of months and a year later - by a different bicycle that suits the rider better.

Starter bikes can fall into a number of categories. Some start with an old bike that a friend or family member gives them, then buys a nicer one after figuring out what kind they actually want (or after the one they've been given falls apart). Others will buy a second-hand bicycle and will later upgrade in the same manner.

Then there is the "budget bike." New cyclists are often reluctant to spend too much money on a new bike, and $500 seems to be a typical budget for those just starting out. So they will purchase a new bike in this price range, but will soon be dissatisfied with the quality. They will then replace it with a higher quality make and model later.

Some bicycles end up replaced because they are the wrong kind of bike for the cyclist. A novice might love the idea of the Dutch Omafiets, but will discover that they just can't ride it in their hilly town. Alternatively, a beginner may start out commuting on a roadbike based on a bike shop's recommendation, but will find it uncomfortable.

Even among seemingly similar bicycles there are differences in handling that may not be apparent at the time of purchase. A perfectly good bicycle of brand X is often sold and replaced with an equally good (and visually similar!) bicycle of Brand Y after just several months of ownership, because the latter better suits the cyclist's ride quality preferences.

All in all, I would say the majority of American transportation cyclists I've spoken to who have been at it for as little as a year, are not riding the same bike now as they did when they first started. And to me this is kind of interesting. Does it mean that novice cyclists would benefit from educating themselves better before making the initial purchase? At one point I thought so, but I no longer do. There are plenty of stories showing that you could be extremely well informed and still buy a bike that is ultimately not right for you.

Another conclusion that is tempting to draw, is that since chances are your first bike will be replaced within a year anyway, buy a cheap one while you hone your preferences. But one thing to consider here is that a low quality bike can discourage cycling entirely. Typical scenario: things start to rattle or go wrong with the bike, and a novice just stops riding. Or, the bike feels extremely uncomfortable or inefficient, and the cyclist decides that this is characteristic of bikes in general. A higher quality bike, even if it is not right for the person in the long run, is more likely to inspire a lasting interest in cycling.

Finally, there is the simple fact that our preferences change over time. Sometimes this has to do with experience. There are bicycles that feel great to a beginner, because they are exceptionally stable and easy to control for those who have not been on a bike in a while. But as the cyclist grows more confident and picks up bike handling skills, the same bicycle can begin to feel limiting due to a lack in speed or maneuverability. But changing preferences need not be a matter of skill - sometimes cyclists just feel like a change from what they were initially attracted to. It seems that with transportation bicycles, there is really no way to know where on the spectrum you will settle. The Starter Bike phenomenon may just be part of the course.

Categories: beginners, bike shopping

Titanium for Transportation?

Over the weekend I am test riding a titanium bicycle from the Dutch manufacturer Van Nicholas that was enthusiastically recommended by a reader. I will be posting a review in the future, but for now I have some general thoughts on titanium bicycles as transportation.

I've been thinking about this more and more after test riding several Seven transportation bicycles over the past few months, including this belt drive cafe racer. While their idea of how a transportation bicycle should be set up is not quite the same as mine, I have to say the ride quality was divine. I could go over all the roots and bumps I wanted and feel nothing.

This is the same sensation (or lack thereof) I had reported after many miles on the Seven racing bike I had on loan over the summer: Riding it with 23mm tires over bumps and potholes, I would feel only an "echo" of going over them, as if it were happening to someone else. At the time I was careful not to attribute this sensation to titanium per se, because I had no experience with other titanium bicycles. But it did make me curious to go out and try some others. This wasn't easy, because titanium bicycles are not exactly common. Still, I managed to briefly ride an older Merlin with 28mm tires. While the ride was completely different from the titanium Sevens, I did experience the same "otherwordly" sensation over bumpy surfaces. Around the same time I also briefly tried a steel and a carbon fiber Seven, and they did not feel like the titanium Sevens. 

Another encounter with titanium took place when I test rode a Brompton over the course of several days. I had heard that bicycles with small wheels tend to have a harsh ride quality, but the Brompton felt just fine. The Co-Habitant pointed out that this could be because the model I'd borrowed was fitted with a titanium fork and rear triangle. "Nonsense," I said, "It can't possibly make a big difference!" But when I returned the Brompton I made it a point to try the all-steel version immediately afterward. Darn, I could feel a difference. The model with the titanium fork and rear tringle had a softer ride quality over bumps. I say "darn," because I was biased toward not wanting to feel a difference: that was one factor that prevented me from actually buying a Brompton, as the titanium model is considerably more expensive.

And now there is the Van Nicholas. This is a touring/commuter model that rides not unlike a titanium version of a Rivendell. At the same time, it has the "echo-like" quality I've noticed in the other titanium bicycles I've tried, and in combination with the 32mm Schwalbe Marathon Supremes I just do not feel the road. It's as if the bike rides on balloon tires, but without the heavy sensation these tires sometimes have.

Having tried about half a dozen titanium or partially titanium bicycles at this point, I can say that I do feel a common aspect in their ride quality independent of manufacturer and geometry - namely the manner in which they dampen road vibration. This alone would make titanium a good candidate for a transportation bicycle, simply because it makes for a comfortable ride without the need for super-wide tires. In addition, titanium does not rust and does not require paint. The frame should be absolutely fine in the winter and in the rain with virtually no need for maintenance. Any scratches can simply be buffed off the surface. Combined with an internally geared hub, which would further reduce the need for maintenance, this type of bike could, in theory, be indestructible - lasting for decades with minimal maintenance. And of course the light weight of titanium does not hurt. The downside? Well-made titanium bikes tend to be painfully expensive - if only because they are typically handmade by small builders.

One framebuilder in the Netherlands has been making titanium Oma-fietsen(!), which I find completely intriguing and would love to try some day. In the meantime, the only other woman-secific titanium frame I have seen is the ladies' version of the Van Nicholas Amazon, but I don't find the design appealing. I wonder whether there would be demand for elegant titanium loop frames in the US, where weight and hill climbing ability tend to be particularly important. While I am generally not attracted to welded frames, the ride quality and other features of titanium have drawn me into becoming increasingly interested in this material and its applications. What do you think? Does titanium appeal to you and would you consider it for a transportation bicycle if it were more readily available?

Categories: bicycle reviews, bike shopping, Brompton, Seven, titanium

How Do You Choose a Winter Bike?

With the snow bound to arrive any week now, I am hearing local cyclists talk about "winter bikes" again. Before my first winter of cycling, the very notion surprised me. You're supposed to ride a different bike in the winter than you do during the rest of the year? why?? But then I understood that not everyone's transportation bicycle is a "tank" that is already winter-proof. Some bikes are more suitable for winter conditions than others. And while there is no one bicycle that is universally considered to be the ideal winter bike, there are certain characteristics most cyclists would probably agree are beneficial for winter commuting in snowy climates:

Stability: One reason the number of cyclists decreases so dramatically in the winter, is that cycling on ice and snow is scary. On the right bike, it is much less so. A winter bicycle should handle well on slippery, snowy, muddy and plow-ravaged winter roads. City bicycles and mountain bikes tend to do best in this respect. Those who commute on aggressive bikes during the warmer months may prefer a more relaxed and more upright bike for winter, with wider tires. If there is a great deal of snow where you live, studded tires could be a good idea, or at least knobby tires. Tame, predictable handling becomes much more important than speed in the winter months. Stepover is another factor to consider. A slippery road surface can make it easier to lose one's balance when mounting and dismounting a bike, and even those who normally ride diamond frames might prefer their winter bike to have a step-though frame or a sloping top tube.

Reliability: Related to the above, it is important that the bicycle's crucial functions - in particular, braking power and shifting ability - are not compromised by winter conditions. Rim brakes and derailleur gears can function poorly (or not at all) if clogged with snow or frozen over, which is why many prefer for their winter commuter to have enclosed hub brakes and hub (or single speed) gearing. 

Durability: Understandably, cyclists may not want to expose their nice bikes to freezing temperatures and road salt, for fear that doing so might damage the frame and components. This is why some recommend getting a "beater bike" for the winter. Personally I am uncomfortable with this advice, because a beater bike is unlikely to be reliable (see above). The approach I prefer is to get a bike that is not vulnerable to the elements in the first place. A tough paintjob, stainless and aluminum components where possible, hub gears and a chaincase should get your bike through the winter relatively unscathed with little maintenance. 

Visibility: Not only does it get dark much earlier in the winter months, but snowfall can further decrease visibility - making good lighting more crucial than ever. 

Presentability: Just because it's winter, does not mean that we are no longer expected to look presentable at work. With road conditions messier than ever, it is important that a winter bicycle be equipped with features that protect the cyclist's clothing: full fenders, and ideally a chaincase or chainguard. 

Taken together, these features suggest a number of candidates that could work especially well as winter bikes. If buying new, fully equipped classic city bikes are worth looking into: They already offer hub gears, hub brakes, a full chaincase, a resilient powdercoated frame, stable handling, generous fenders and reasonably wide tires. Recently I wrote about city bikes with mountain bike heritage, which might be particularly appropriate due to their super-stable handling. For those who prefer to put a bike together from scratch, frames with horizontal dropouts (suitable for hub and single speed conversion) and clearances for reasonably wide tires are now easily available from a number of manufacturers: Soma, Surly, Rawland, Rivendell, Salsa and Velo Orange are just a few that come to mind. For extreme conditions there are even all-terrain models that will fit monstrously wide tires, such as the Surly Pugsley and Moonlander, and the Salsa Mukluk. If you prefer to refurbish a used bicycle, an old mountain bike converted to a single speed and fitted with some upright handlebars could work nicely. Same with a vintage 3-speed, fitted with a modern wheelset with hub brakes.

It goes without saying that not everything mentioned here will be applicable to every cyclist who reads this. The kind of winter bike that is ideal for you will depend on everything from the harshness of your winters, to the character of your route, to your bike handling skills, to your bike storage situation, to the amount of time you are willing to devote to bike maintenance, and to the type of clothing you wear when cycling for transportation. Your current bike may already be a winter bike, either as is or with minor modifications. Or you may need to get an additional bike specifically for winter cycling. My own preference gravitates toward classic city bicycles, and those I've owned have made great winter bikes. But I've been increasingly curious to try a mountain bike with knobby tires and see how that compares. What is your idea of a winter bike?

Categories: bike shopping, winter cycling

Thinking It Through: Why Unique Bikes Should Come with Accessories

I've been riding the Paper Bicycle for just over a week, and in some ways my experience with it reminds me of when I first got the Bella Ciao last year.  My initial reaction was that of ecstasy over the ride quality. Not that the two bikes feel the same - far from it. But each rides great in its own distinct way, and works better for me than most other city bicycles I've tried thus far. 

When I am this happy with how a bicycle rides, of course my first thought is "Oh my God, this thing is amazing, I want to ride it all the time!" And therein lies the problem... because I can't. Like the Bella Ciao of yesteryear, the Paper Bicycle did not come with lights or a rack. Okay, so I can begrudgingly clip on battery lights when it gets dark. But the problem of how to carry my things on the bike is more serious. I am just not willing to ride around with a backpack for weeks for the sake of my blog's test ride reports, after investing in racks and panniers on my own bikes specifically to avoid that. 

Whereas for a "normal" bike I could simply buy a rack, that is not an option when a bicycle is so unusual as to make standard racks functionally or aesthetically unworkable. There is only one rack on the market with which the Paper Bicycle is compatible (the Burley rack, with the use of an adaptor). But even that option is a bad idea in my view, because it kills the unique look of the bike. Similarly, the Bella Ciao was, in theory, compatible with the Pletscher rack, but using it undermined both the elegant form of the frame and the pains the manufacturer had taken to make the bicycle as light as possible. For the Bella Ciao, the only solution I ultimately found was to have a custom rack made. I think the same must be done for the Paper Bicycle in order to make it appealing as not just a design concept, but a complete package. I know that the manufacturer is working on a rack design, and I am really hoping they make it sufficiently "paperbikey," integrated with the rest of the bicycle in the same elegant manner as the chaincase. 

It's only natural that the more enjoyable a bicycle is to ride, the more crucial these details become. The customer's joy after experiencing a fantastic test ride can quickly turn to disappointment upon learning that the bicycle cannot be made practical for commuting without destroying its looks. Similarly, as a reviewer I cannot properly evaluate a transport bike if I am ultimately unable to use it for everyday transportation as I would my own bikes. I strongly believe that this is something manufacturers need to consider and address when they create a unique product.  

Categories: Bella Ciao, bicycle industry, bike shopping, Paper Bicycle

The Weight Sneaks Up on You

Cycling along the Charles River last week, I stopped to enjoy the scenery and eat an apple, when a smiling couple approached me. They had seen a bike like mine at Harris Cyclery and the woman was considering getting one. She asked to have a closer look and examined it with admiration.

But her smile quickly fell when she tried to pick it up. "Oh my God! I don't remember the one at the bike shop being this heavy!" Oh boy, I thought... Did I just ruin a sale for Harris?

  

As a general observation, I get the sense that when people shop for bikes they often don't take into account which components and accessories the floor model is fitted with. And this can give them an inaccurate sense of what the bicycle would actually be like to use in everyday life, once they fit it with all the cool things they read about on the internet. They don't think it can possibly make that big of a difference. But of course it does. 

The first time I tried a Rivendell Sam Hillborne, the floor model was a basic build fitted with 35mm tires, and no lighting, fenders, or racks. Sure, it felt fairly light.

However, when my own bike was assembled, it got a dynamo hub, 42mm tires, aluminum fenders, a headlight, a tail light, a kickstand, a waterbottle cage, a stainless steel waterbottle, a computer, Power Grips, and a brass bell. Taken individually, each of these items seems hardly worth mentioning. But taken together, I could feel an obvious difference between my own bike and the floor model. Several  months later, I added a front rack. And then a handlebar bag. Naturally, the bike got heavier still. Finally, a year later I added a rear rack with removeable lowrider panels, which I don't always bother to remove. 

Moral of the story? It's real easy to turn a <30lb bike into a 40lb bike. Every extra component, every rack, bag, basket and other accessory we pile on adds weight - not to mention the stuff we end up carrying in those bags and baskets. And that's fine - that's normal and good, as all of those things are usually done to add functionality to the bike. But let's be fair and compare like to like. When bicycle shopping, beware that a floor model may appear lighter than your own bicycle, without actually being lighter once you set it up in the same manner.

Categories: bike shopping, Rivendell

Frills or Basics?

In the comments of recent posts there has been some interesting discussion about spending money on bicycles and accessories. I am not going to delve into some of the more existential issues raised, but one theme I found funny was the difference in our willingness to spend money on bikes versus accessories. Some are willing to spend a hefty sum on a bicycle, but don't really go for fancy components or accessories beyond the basics. Others would never spend more than several hundred dollars on a bike, but are perfectly happy to pay for component upgrades and fancy luggage.

My personal bias falls toward the former. If I have a set budget and I am building up a bicycle from scratch, I am liable to spring for the nicest frame I can manage and then settle for inexpensive components until I can afford better ones. Or else just buy the frame alone, then wait another year while I save up for the rest. And while I know that components can influence ride quality as much as the frame, I just can't help but place more importance on the latter. The frame is the key in defining the bike for me, while  components can always be replaced if need be. But I realise that not everyone feels that way. In Boston I sometimes see things like a Surly frame with Phil Wood hubs, or a Linus bike with a limited edition Brooks saddle and grips, and it's always mystified me - those things cost more than the rest of the bike! One woman's told me that she finds it more interesting to spend money on components and accessories, because there is a great deal of choice and it feels playful. A frame, on the other hand, is "just there" - kind of a boring part of the bike unless one is especially interested in geometry and frame design. Okay, I sort of understand that take on it. But I definitely can't relate!

Do you tend to splurge on the frills or the basics? Or do you opt for the sensible middle-ground?

Categories: bike shopping

The Grass is Always Greener...

As the summer season of bike shopping continues, some are still looking for the right bicycle while others have already snagged one. And if the emails I receive are any indication, those in the latter category are often plagued with "the grass is greener" regrets.

I bought a Dutch bike, but now I'm thinking it's kind of heavy. Should I have gotten a mixte?

I bought a mixte, but now I'm thinking it's kind of aggressive and twitchy. Should I have gotten a Dutch bike?

I bought a vintage bike, but the components are creaky and it seems unreliable. Wish I'd sucked it up and bought a new one.

I bought a new bike and sold my old rust bucket on C-List. Now I wish I hadn't, because the old one was so much more comfortable!

Look: I don't know what to tell you, except that all of these scenarios make sense. No bicycle is perfect. How do you think I ended up with three transportation bikes?... And even that has not made me immune to the "grass is always greener" effect. Having delivered the Pilen to the venue from whence it will be shipped to the give-away recipient, I am now nostalgic for its super-stable ride and off-road capacity. I remain haunted by the memories of riding Anna's ridiculously gorgeous Retrovelo last year. And seeing the Rivendell Betty Foy makes me wistful every time, just because it is so iconic.

I don't think there is a moral to this story, except that we humans are annoyingly indecisive, covetous creatures. And perhaps also that there is a greater choice for wonderful transportation bicycles out there than ever. Determine what your priorities are, conduct thorough test rides, and don't expect the impossible. No matter how wonderful your new bicycle is, you will always discover an aspect of it where the one you had been considering instead might have fared better.

Categories: bike shopping, pilen