How to calculate width of 28" tire to 26" with constant damping factor? Let's say you have a 28" tire with X width.

The question is how to calculate the width for 26" tire to get the same damping factor? I am looking only for solid solutions.

I will assume that calculating it backwards is simple reformulating the equation.

Update

"Solid solution" = "I tried it, I know it, so I say it".

Damping = it is like "user experience", you ride and either it feels comfortable or not. After all I hit both kinds of obstacles, rails for example and holes in the street (Poland is famous because of them).

Tires -- what I have in mind, is exactly the same tires, same manufacturer, same type, etc. Currently I use 26" 2.35" (Fat Frank and Super Moto) tires, and I am wondering (approximately) what 28" tires would be the equivalent.

From my experience, dampening depends too much on non-dimensional factors. That makes very difficult to come with a formula that would work reliably.

Of course the width of the tire is a very important factor, and balloon tires always will dampen better than skinny ones.

But the hardness of the carcass (be it the layers within or even the rubber hardness itself, or the thread pattern) plays such an important role that I think it counts more than the difference in diameter from 26 to 28 inch wheel sizes.

I have ridden wide tires which were very bumpy and uncomfortable, and narrow ones that just made the harshness of the road disappear.

Also, and this might help to formulate a real answer to your question, are you referring to the transversal dampening, where the tire's cross section counts a lot, or to the longitudinal dampening, where the wheel diameter counts more - and which is responsible for "rolling over" obstacles being smoother on bigger wheels - ?

It is not solid solution which I asked for, but since there are no better answers at the time of writing this should fit.

If you spot here an error or over-simplication let me know.

I will assume tire is torus-shaped. It is not true, but it has to stay, because real shape is to computational expensive to handle.

Comfort

Crossing holes

Like crossing the rails, here diameter matters.

26 + 2 * w26 = 28+2*w28

So you get w28 = w26-1 (translating into English -- you can have width 1" narrower than with 26" tires to get the same effect of rolling over holes).

Crossing obstacles

Another assumption -- when we hit an obstacle only pressure is changed, and the force from the tire material is negligible. Not even going to formula for force of changing pressure of the air, it is sufficient to notice we are not seeking the formula, we are seeking the same effect for 26" and 28". So the only factor that matters here is the volume of the tires -- it has to be identical to get identical effect.

Volume of torus: 2 * Pi ^2 * R * r ^ 2, here r is half of the width of the tire, and R is half of the size of the wheel.

2 * Pi ^ 2 * 26"/2 * (w26/2)^2 = 2 * Pi ^ 2 * 28"/2 * (w28/2)^2
26" * w26^2 = 28" * w28^2
sqrt(26/28) * w26 = w28

The scaling factor is here ~ .96, this is more tighter constraint than the first one.

Conclusion

For above 2" width tire (my case), I can have 0.1 narrower tire in 28" to get the same feeling when riding.

The effort

If I want to ride comfortably I have to consider air resistance.

resistance ratio = w28*(28+2*w28) / w26*(26+2*w26)

It tells how much resistance will change:

= sqrt(26/28) * w26 *(28+2*sqrt(26/28) * w26) / w26*(26+2*w26)
= sqrt(26/28)*(28+2*sqrt(26/28)*w26) / (26+2*w26)
= sqrt(26/28)*28+2*(26/28)*w26 / (26+2*w26)
= sqrt(26*28)+(52/28)*w26 / (26+2*w26)
=~ 26.98+1.86*w26 / 26+2*w26

For 26", 2.35" tire the ratio would be 1.02.

Please note there is constant speed assumed. You usually go for 28" tires to get more speed, and air resistance is proportional to the square of the speed!

Now, for gusts of the wind from the side:

resistance ratio
= 2*Pi*(28/2+w28)^2-2*Pi*(28/2)^2
  / 2*Pi*(26/2+w26)^2-2*Pi*(26/2)^2

I don't count for spokes, fork, they are important factors, but it will make computations even more complex (and besides, the effect will be different for blade spokes, and for regular).

= (14+w28)^2-14^2 / (13+w26)^2-13^2
= (14+w28+14)(14+w28-14) / (13+w26+13)(13+w26-13)
= (28+w28)*w28 / (26+w26)*w26
= 28*w28+w28^2 / 26*w26+w26^2
= 28*sqrt(26/28)*w26+(sqrt(26/28)*w26)^2 / 26*w26+w26^2
= 28*sqrt(26/28)*w26+(26/28)*w26^2 / 26*w26+w26^2
= 28*sqrt(26/28)+(26/28)*w26 / 26+w26
=~ 26.98+0.93*w26 / 26+w26

Let's say w26=2.35. The ratio is 1.03 (a bit of surprise).

So, there is no free lunch after all ;-) However if you forgive discomfort when hitting obstacles, you can build 28" bike faster in regard of air resistance and yet the one which rolls over with much more ease than 26".

The weight

Because of the difference of the radius, even the same weight is more harder to to move in case of 28". I will calculate this factor some other time.

My choice

If I go for 28" bike (I didn't yet decide) I will change my 26" 2.35" tires to 28" 2" -- they should be faster (~0.9 less resistance), they will go more easily over the holes, and they will be just a bit stiffer when hitting an obstacle.

I thank Slovakov from BikeForum.pl for spotting the errors in equations. All still existing errors are only mine of course ;-).


Lights that don’t use o-rings I’ve looked through this site and couldn’t find a question asking the same. Sorry if this is a duplicate. Also, apologies as I’m posting on phone.
Are there any bike light sets that don’t rely on the o-ring design to attach them to the frame?
I hate having to fumble with o-rings every day when taking my lights on or off to charge. I would rather have a design where the mount is attached to the frame and you simply slide the light into it to hear a click alongside a quick release. Does such design exist? Or something similar that doesn’t involve taking the whole thing on or off?

To give a brand neutral answer: all the big light brands have at least some o-ring mounting styles now, but some of them still offer clip-in brackets as optional parts for the same lights. And there are still some around that come with that type, but it's the kind of brand-specific thing that changes a lot and so is off-topic here. So short answer, find lights you like or already have, and look at the spare parts options offered for them.

Are there any bike light sets that don’t rely on the o-ring design to attach them to the frame?

Yes, there are. Any decent StVZO compliant light from any quality German manufacturer can be attached not only to handlebars but to also the fork crown. None of those attachments rely on O-rings as that would be stupid. The whole idea of StVZO is that the headlight beam pattern must illuminate the road but not make oncoming drivers and riders blind. Thus, the headlight angle needs to be very carefully adjusted. With O-rings, that adjustment would not stay set as a minor touch to the headlight such as to remove a battery headlight from the handlebars would alter the angle.
The very best of the lights are powered by a hub dynamo (on a regular bike) or the e-bike battery system (on an e-bike -- it would be ridiculous to convert e-bike battery electricity to forwards motion and then re-convert the very same forwards motion again to electricity on a hub dynamo).
Many of the hub dynamo lights have a standlight so you get light for 4 minutes after stopping. Also quality hub dynamo lights don't flicker like the cheap ones do. You may also find many lights available with an automatic environmental brightness based sensor to toggle on and off the light based on ambient light level.
I think you'll find that some of the lights are powered by a battery. They are a poor solution. They need constant recharging and you need to remove the light every time you leave the bicycle locked so it won't get stolen. A hub dynamo light does not require recharging and is unlikely to be stolen.
Also if your fork crown has fender/light attachments, you want to attach the light there. The reason is that the lower the light is, the more shadows obstacles make so with a low-mounted light you are more likely to see hazards on an uneven road. Mounting it even lower, on a fork blade, could be done but then your wheel makes a nasty shadow on one side so that's not preferred. So that's why all quality lights attach to the fork crown as a first option and the handlebars only as a second option if the fork crown doesn't have the attachment point.


How long do brake pads last in storage? I’ve discovered in my parts box some rim brake pads that have been there for several years. Aside from age, they are in fine shape (some are new). Can I put these on my bike, or is there hidden damage?

In other words, how long do stored rim brake pads remain safe?

I have already bought some pads that the LBS had for more than 4 years, and they work perfectly. I think the specific compounds from which brake pads (and tires, most probably) is not prone to self-degeneration if stored in a "normal" environment.

So, the suggestion would be to take a ride and check if the pads brake well. If so, use normally.

I wouldn't worry about the viability of old brake pads, unless there is something obviously wrong with them.


Advice needed re Carbon Fiber vs Shocks I am an occasional rider who bought my last bike 15 years ago (an all-aluminium Saracen with shocks). I've put about 400-500 miles this year and am thinking of taking up one of the Cycle to Work schemes to get a new bike.

So I remember when I went from my steel, fully-rigid Diamond Back, to my Saracen. "Wow!" is the only way I remember the luxury of getting shocks. I plan to do 20 miles a day (90% road / 10% off-road) for commuting, and have been advised to get a carbon fibre cyclocross bike. But no cross bikes seem to have shocks, and, despite what I've been told, I just cannot believe that carbon frame & forks can offer the same amount of shock absorbtion as shocks.

There's much BS floating around about the wonders of carbon fibre, and while I would like a light bike, by the time I've added lights, mudguards, and a trip computer for road use, saving a few ounces here and there seems a bit silly.

The gearing of the bike I am thinking of (Planet X XLS Shimano 105 Cyclocross) seems perfect, with a top gear of 46/11t on 700c wheels. My biggest complaint about my Saracen is the lack of a really long gear for the roads, but the lack of shocks on the Planet X really does worry me. As an aside, I am most definitely not Mr. Super-fit, being 5 1/2 decades young, and with the weight problems (85-90Kg) that go with being such a spring chicken.

So does anybody have some real empiric evidence that CF forks are as good as Shocks for the use I have in mind or is there just too much marketing BS out there to form a firm opinion ?

Any sound advice would be appreciated !

There's no frame material in the world that will absorb bumps like a bike with a suspension fork/frame.

However, the original "suspension" invention that made bicycles practical was the pneumatic tire. If you have a rigid frame and fork, that's all the real suspension you have.

Skinny road tires at high psi have about 2-3mm of "travel", a fat commuter tire at 60 psi will have close to 25mm of travel. A suspension fork generally has about 100mm of travel.

A CX bike is a good choice to build a commuter around since they generally take fatter tires ( usually up to 32mm ), but there's absolutely no reason to get a carbon CX bike for commuting. Especially one that does not take a rack or have fender mounts.

With fat tires at the correct PSI, I think you would have a very hard time distinguishing between different frame materials in a blind test. Geometry and tire size make so much more of a difference than what the frame is made of.

To enjoy your commute, I'd recommend finding a balance in the middle. A bike with suspension is going to be heavy and slow and overkill 99% of the time. A "racy" carbon CX bike is going to be fast, but rough and the handling will be a bit twitchy. A good commuter should take fat tires(32mm at least), have a relatively long wheelbase and slacker angles.

But you can commute on anything. You might just try putting slicks on the bike you already have and see how that works for you. If you are going to get a new bike, I'd really suggest looking at CX/commuter bikes with disk brakes.

For 90% road carbon

Shocks plus:
 - More travel
Shocks minus:
 - Heavy
 - Absorb pedal energy
 - Wear out

Carbon fork plus:
 - Light
 - Comfortable
Carbon fork minus:
 - Small travel

I ride carbon frame and carbon fork mountain bike with low pressure tubeless.


Bent fork, is it replaceable? I got into an accident on my Raleigh Revenio 1.0 nearly 5 years ago. I've ridden it 400-500km since then with no problems. I don't see any damage to my top tube, down tube, or head tube. It turns out that I bent my fork, but I didn't know that until just last week.

I've moved from the USA to The Netherlands recently and I my local bike shop guy says professionally he thinks it is unsafe to ride, but personally he'd ride it. I have a few questions:

Can I get this replaced? My LBS guy says it's some kind of integrated system that is out of date now. Also, the bike is American and I'm in Europe. Maybe I can get a replacement more easily in the USA?
How dangerous is this to ride? I have a race (triathlon with 40km bike) in 2 weeks and I'm hesitant either to switch bikes now (plus I'm kinda broke) or to use a rental for the day.

I know tons about swimming and running (coached both for many years), but next to nothing about cycling, so any help will be very much appreciated. I know my bike is a 56cm frame, but beyond that I'm a novice. Thanks for any help you can provide.

You have three hazards.

First, there is some danger that the fork could fail catastrophically.  But if you are religious about inspecting the fork for cracks on a regular basis (and taking action of some sort should a crack appear) then the danger of this is low.

Second, having the wheel pushed back reduces your toe clearance, which can result in nasty spills if your toe hangs up on the wheel.  But there are many bikes designed with less clearance than yours, so this is a personal choice kind of thing.

Third, and possibly most significant, the damage affects the delicate geometry -- the "rake" and "trail" -- of the front wheel.  This affects handling and stability in subtle (and not so subtle) ways.  But if you've been riding the damaged bike for 5 years and not noticed this you've either become accustomed to this or the effect is not strong enough to worry about.

The bike looks like a reasonably popular one in the US, though I can't say about the specific model.  It's possible you could find a damaged one to scavenge parts from, but you'd have to be sure the "donor" bike did not have front end damage.

I do not advise you to drive like that, it's dangerous. It is better to replace the bent plug with a new one.


iPhone 4 bike mount recommendations Can anyone recommend a good bike mount for the iPhone 4?

There seem to be a lot of reviews for the old models.

Update: I'm mounting this on a Trek 1.5 Triple with Bontrager SSR VR bars.

Update: I've heard horror stories about phones popping out of mounts so having it secure would be good, waterproofing is a plus as well.

Biologic now makes an iPhone 4 specific mount. I have the 3 version that I use an iPhone 4 in.  It's pretty decent, but this looks like they've made some good improvements.

I have no expreience with this, but this came up on Urban Velo. They claim to fit perfectly for iPhone 4 an similar sized devices: http://urbanvelo.org/minoura-ih-100-smart-phone-holder/


Recommendations for 'upgrading' gravel bike with road tires? EDIT:  Several people have commented that I shouldn't ask for shopping recommendations -- fair enough, but really all I want is a more general discussion of the topic: whether it's a reasonable goal to try to make your gravel bike 'more road bike-like' with different tires, and how to achieve it.  You don't need to mention any specific products.

I have a 2020 Giant Revolt 3 (https://www.giant-bicycles.com/us/revolt-advanced-3) gravel bike that I ride 99% on tarmac.  I was considering a road bike, but as I was coming from a mountain bike background and had never ridden a road bike, this seemed a good compromise.  I thought I'd be taking it out on gravel trails, but with Covid restrictions (we are confined to a pretty small area) and the fact that I am trying to avoid train travel (again, due to Covid), I'm riding it pretty much only on the road.
My bike shop said it's almost time to replace the tires and I'm looking for recommendations for new tubeless tires.  I'm wondering whether there is any choice that would move me a little bit in the 'road bike direction' in terms of reducing drag and increasing performance, but maintain the grip and stability, particularly in wet weather, that I've gotten used to.
Most important is maintaining safety (grip and cornering, particularly going downhill, and in the wet), but, as said, I'd be keen to see if I can get a little more "quickness" (trying to move in the 'road bike' direction, that is, reducing drag while riding).  Is it possible to maintain the same level of safety with a 'road tire'?
Finally, is my goal even a reasonable one? I checked out How much energy is lost with a gravel tire compared with a road tire? and while there is a difference in running gravel tires or 'road' tires, I am not sure how important it is.
For what it's worth, I ride mainly up and down on hills (daily climb is about 600m), and live in the EU (so I'd need to buy the tires here).  The rims are Giant S-X2 Disc, and the current tires are Giant Crosscut AT 1, 700x38.
Thanks!

"whether it's a reasonable goal to try to make your gravel bike 'more road bike-like' with different tires"
It is.
"and how to achieve it."
By mounting a road tyre. That is all there is to it.

We can then get into long arguments between the proponents of Continental vs. Schwalbe, vs Challenge vs. Vittoria vs. Tufo vs. whatever...
It is not productive.
Take a a high performance road tyre and if you really need high performance, think about an aero road wheelset (or an ultralight one, if you mostly climb hills). That is, of course, much more expensive.

I have a 2020 Giant Revolt 3 (https://www.giant-bicycles.com/us/revolt-advanced-3) gravel bike that I ride 99% on tarmac. I was considering a road bike, but as I was coming from a mountain bike background and had never ridden a road bike, this seemed a good compromise.

You made a good choice. Gravel bikes are far more optimal on the road than road bikes for many reasons: longer wheelbase, more sturdy construction, smaller likelihood of using carbon fiber and larger likelihood of using chromium molybdenum steel, improved tire clearance, larger likelihood of disc brakes, more upright riding position, larger likelihood of having 36 spokes on the wheels, larger likelihood of being able to fit mudguards and pannier rack, higher weight typically (so more durable), a larger spread of gears on the rear cassette so you don't have to click...click...click your way across a corncob cassette with 1-tooth differences, etc.
I firmly believe what today is called "road bike" should be called "racing bike", and what today is called "gravel bike" should be called "road bike".

My bike shop said it's almost time to replace the tires and I'm looking for recommendations for new tubeless tires. I'm wondering whether there is any choice that would move me a little bit in the 'road bike direction' in terms of reducing drag and increasing performance, but maintain the grip and stability, particularly in wet weather, that I've gotten used to.

If you ride on the road, the best wet weather grip belongs to slick tires with no tread pattern that have carbon black tread. A typical road tire. Oops, you cannot buy a tire without a tread pattern, because it's so SCARY!!! to ride on a slick tire, so all we have are tires with a minimal micro tread pattern that wears away in no time (like Continental Grand Prix 5000). Plus, a tire with no tread pattern rolls more stably on a road than a patterned tire.

Most important is maintaining safety (grip and cornering, particularly going downhill, and in the wet)

If done on the road, this calls for a slick carbon black tire.

I'd be keen to see if I can get a little more "quickness" (trying to move in the 'road bike' direction, that is, reducing drag while riding)

This too calls for a slick carbon black tire.

Is it possible to maintain the same level of safety with a 'road tire'?

Yes, as long as you avoid the colored tires that don't have carbon black in the rubber compound.


Are Merrell Barefoot shoes suitable for bike touring? These are the specific shoes: http://www.merrell.com/US/en-US/Product.mvc.aspx/22876M/0/Mens/Barefoot-True-Glove?dimensions=0

I'm going on a 210 mile bike trip this weekend and am looking for a new pair of shoes. Would these be appropriate for touring?

I own a pair of these shoes, and while they are good for "barefoot" style running. I wouldn't want to bike with them except in an emergency. They are very flexible, with a thin sole that you can feel everything through. As such, I would say that they are definitely not fit for touring.

No, 'barefoot' shoes are good for walking/running, etc.; therefore, not stiff enough for pushing on pedals comfortably.  Using 'clipless' shoes without a cleat provides a stiff sole, but a thick one.  Before these thick, clipless cleat shoes became ubiquitous, there were "cycle touring shoes" that were both stiff and thin soled.  They also had relatively smooth soles, good for adjusting your position on the pedal, not the heavily lug soles of modern cleated, clipless shoes. I am still looking for these thin soled cycle touring shoes.  Any ideas?


Choosing mudguards for carrying a bicycle in a small lift I am in need for mudguards for a bicycle I bought.

Here is a link to the bicycle's description: Speeder i8 The bike is a flatbar road bike, with an internal hub and roller brakes.

The bicycle is always carried in a small lift where it is positioned vertically on its rear wheel because of space limitations.

The mudguards I see in stores that would fit this bicycle have a problem: they are of "full length" and cover the wheel part that touches ground when positioned vertically.

What I need is something like these shorter fenders.
However, most fenders sold are larger, like these.

Are there any pre-made solutions?

You could try something with slightly less coverage like the sks raceblades. However, the sks commuter fenders have less clearance in the back. It still might be too much though.  Clip on fenders like the portland design work soda pop fenders may be an option for you as well, but they provide less coverage overall.

Fenders are one of those things that are pretty easy to hack yourself if you have some small tools.  I trim off some material from the fender to make it fit.

I would bolt it on to the fender mounts on your rear dropouts and then measure the distance from the actual end of the fender to where you would like the fender to end. Then, on the other side of the fender, where you secure it near the cranks, I would mark the fender and trim that much material off from the end.  You could do this with a coping saw or a dremel tool pretty easily on plastic fenders. You'll need to re-drill a mounting hole.

You might not be able to trim the fender in a straight line, you may have to cut it in a similar pattern to the bottom of the existing fender, depending on the fender's width. Skinny fenders may need little to no tapering at the bottom, while large fenders may need to be thinned down a lot. Really, just make it look like the end you're chopping off and it should be fine.  You could trace the shape on to some paper, cut it out, and trace that on the fender before making your cuts.

You might also want to put some washers on either side of the new hole for extra reinforcement.

A full length mudguard does not serve much purpose to you, but it is a courtesy to other riders who may be trailing behind you: it keeps you from spraying water and debris high into the air behind you.

You could just stand the bicycle on the mudguard when inside that small lift. You're assuming that the mudguard will be damaged, but perhaps that assumption is wrong.

If you stand the bicycle on the mudguard, the mudguard will probably bend until it makes contact with the wheel, and that will cause the mudguard's supporting rods to also bend. This is not good, but perhaps the situation can be remedied by inserting some spacers between the mudguard and tire, such as eraser rubbers.

The rubber pieces will transfer the force from the contact area where the mudguard rests on the floor directly to the tire, relieving the mudguard and its hardware from stress.

If you're worried about scratching the mudguard, you can put some tape on the contact area. (Hmm, will there be a rear reflector on your mudguard?) Or just carry some small cloth for that occasion. You can wrap the erasers in it when it's not in use.

Incidentally, that rear reflector is another good reason for a full-length rear mudguard. It's a good spot for it.


How can I stop an Adult trike when both front brakes fail? I have a lovely easy adult trike and I use it all the time.
Now the thing is because it's a trike, it only has front brakes.

Well on the 14th Feb I was riding to my local charity, got to the hill and was
riding it down when Twang the brake wire snapped and I desperately tried the other front
brake this was gone too ... now this path leads on to a very busy road, with the two chicanes with metal fences ... with both brakes gone. I had no choice but to run into the second fence, a silver metal bar type.

Sorry about this long question is there any way I can add a brake to the two rear wheels of my trike to stop this happen again?

If this can't be done can I stop myself any other way?  .....

Update on this question. The brakes have been fixed for now... Tires are pumped up and I am oiling the Chain drive....Have to check the information provided.
Thanks please continue to answer the above question. Just bare in mind I am new...sorry if finding an answer takes a long time.. I like to look at all options.

Answering for completeness:

Don't get in this situation and Prevention is better than cure

You should have picked up that the brakes were not as good as they were by feel (poor braking) or on visual inspection noticed that the inner cables were starting to fray.

Most bikes have two independent brakes.  For yours to both fail at the same time is quite unlikely.

And even if you did successfully add a rear brake, a continuous lack of maintenance may leave that in as bad a state as the other two brakes,

A basic M check should be done weekly.

You didn't say it was a recumbent, so I'm going to assume it is just a rear-wheel drive version of the trikes we rode before we got a 2-wheeler.  So, this is how I stop mine if there is a brake problem or if I can't get my hand up there quickly enough (carrying packages or kiddies)

Really simple--I put my foot on the top of the front wheel just behind the front fork (my trike is one in front and two in rear) If you have a fender mounted up front, you may have to press the fender into the wheel from a littler further from the top of the fork and with more of a side-side action.

If you have a 2-in front and one in rear setup... it will need fenders for this trick to work... or if the trike's construction allows... put your foot into the rear wheel towards the [trike's equivalent] of the chain-stay.


Are 700 x 28 , 700 x 32 and 700 x 35 tires interchangeable? I have a cyclocross bike with Alex ATD 470 Disc rim with TCS (Tubeless Compatible System) currently mounted with Vittoria, Cross XN, 700 x 32c tires. However tires are a bit worn out and I want to be driving a bit off road during the winter.

My question is whether the 700x32 tires would be interchangeable with 700x35 for winter and with 700x28 for summer?

Thanks in advance. I understand that technically this should be possible, but whether it is okey to do that, since I believe that in certain occasion I would have to overinflate tire ( 700x28 ), right?

You can (theoretically) mount any 700x(something) tire on any 700c  (ISO 622) rim. However, you need to make sure the frame (and brakes if rim brakes are used) can clear the tire without rubbing.

You generally want to match the rim width to the tire though -- too narrow or too wide of a tire on a rim can lead to tire/rim damage or bad handling.

In your case, the rim width is 17 mm and the chart linked above says 25-37 should all be fine.

As for overinflating, why would you overinflate? You will use a higher pressure with a narrower tire, but overinflating means putting too much air in. And this can be bad for the rim. The right tire pressure is not whats written on the sidewall of the tire -- in fact, you'll almost never use that much pressure. We have many questions on tire pressure setup, so I encourage you to use the search feature to look at some of them.

I run on Alex ATD 470 rims with 700x48 Vittoria Randonneurs. This works fine and it produces an amazing ride.  The only question is frame clearance, which in fine on my Novara Mazama (even with SKS longboards). I run pressures from 35psi to 60 psi without any sidewall or rim damage. The capacity of the rims to accommodate wide tires has not given me any trouble. The Novara Mazama, favorably reviewed by Patrick O'Grady in Adventure Cycling in May 2015,is sold with ATD 470 rims with Clement X-Plor 700x40 tires. The very popular Novara Safari comes with the same wheels with the 700x48 Vittoria Randonneurs.


Which bike lock should I choose? For a long time I was a happy owner of an Abus Catena chain lock. However, last night someone tried to steal my bike. Luckily, they either didn't have enough time, or the lock was too tough for them so they abandoned it after cutting through 0.5mm from two sides.

Now I am looking for a better, more secure and more deterrent-looking lock. These are my current options:

Abus Granit Plus 51: U lock, security rating 13/15, 13mm thinckness, 23cm height, costs 46€
Abus Bordo 6000: folding lock, security rating 10/15, 5mm thickness, 90cm length, costs 55€

With the first one, I like the better security. However U locks are sometimes pain in the ass to set, especially because I usually lock front wheel and frame to a stationary object. I am not sure if this is even possible with this U lock, as the distance from the inside of the rim to the inside of the frame is a little more than 20cm.

I like the folding lock, because it is more versatile. I can lock my bike to a variety of stationary objects, but it is less secure for sure. Also, it is a bit more expensive.

I will keep my old chain lock, as it is not damaged too much and change the outer skirt so that nobody knows it was damaged. I thing it should be OK as a secondary lock when I leave my bike overnight in a communal room.
Any ideas what could be a smart choice?

I have recently been in a neighborhood watch training. Bike theft was one of the topic.

They showed us a footage where they asked a skilled thief to break various locks, from low end dental floss (10 Euro worth) to high end sturdy looking one (60 Euro). The thief was able to take rid of all of them in a matter of about 30 seconds, with few difference between flimsy and sturdy ones.

Bottom line: the only way to safely lock your bike is make it an hassle to remove all the locks with respect to the other available targets.

Use redundant locks (they will require more time to be removed)
Lock your bike where other similar bikes are available (thieves go for the low hanging fruit, unless you park a carbon frame 5000 Euro bike among steel 100 Euro bikes)
Make it hard for the thief to be unnoticed while working around your locks (don't lock your bike in a dark and out of sight alley)

Everybody, thanks for weighting in.

I decided to go for a more expensive, less secure option because of the extra convenience it offers.

U lock are not that common in the place where I live and many many people use a folding lock. Also, I will be able to change the outer hull on my old chain lock so nobody will know it is damaged and will use it as a secondary stationary lock.
This is OK, as nobody in the communal area where I leave my bike uses two locks. :)


How can you speed a road-bike up? So, I have an 80's raleigh bike, reassembled from spare parts.  I'm wondering what the best way to get more speed out of the bike is.  Wheels?  Gears?  Lighter gear? Different pedals? I'm rather fond of the frame, so I'd rather not replace that.

Gabe,  If you love the frame, and are willing to spend the money to keep it, start upgrading everything else.  Start with:

Wheels/tires - rotating mass will slow you down the most - go to aluminum wheels and thin/light tires size 23 or 25.

Bottom Crank - Once again rotating mass, you can get some hollow core cranks, and adjust the chainring sizes to the biggest you can push.  You can save a few grams by going to a compact crank versus a triple.

Shifters/derailleur(s) - get some aero shifters/brakes, and upgrade to a lighter front/rear derailleur.

Seat post, handlebars, stem - On an old raleigh, they are probably steel - you can get inexpensive aluminum replacements.

Seat - get rid of the OG heavy seat and get something more comfortable and lighter.

From expensive and most effective, to least expensive/effective, thats the list off the top of my head.

Good luck on your decision, and keep those old Raleighs going, they are great bikes :)

New aluminum road bikes will help to increase your speed a lot. is not just the rider but a combo of rider and bike that makes up your riding speed.


If I'm riding on the road, and there is a red light but a walk signal in my direction, should I go? I frequently come to stop lights in which there is an all-way stop and a pedestrian signal. I always stop at such lights, but I'm wondering if I should then bike slowly across after determining that it is safe and I will not be interfering with any pedestrians who are crossing, or if I should wait until the light turns green just as I would were I driving a car.

Only cross if you are walking and pushing your bike.  If you are riding, you are a vehicle and generally you are required to obey all traffic control devices in the same way any other vehicle operator is. There are exceptions, like the Idaho Yield laws, but generally you have to behave like a car.

The other thing to think about is that the more you behave like a vehicle, the more predictable you are, and the more predictable the behavior of other vehicle operators will be.

In the Netherlands it is illegal unless signs explicitly indicate that it isn't, but I'd cross, taking care not to hit or even scare any pedestrians. Traffic lights are too heavy handed for bicycles.


What is the difference between brake cables and derailleur cables? What is the difference between brake cables and derailleur/shift cables? When I look online for replacement cables I see "brake cables" and "shift cables."

From the images they all look the same.

Furthermore, what is the difference between mountain bike specific cables and road bike specific cables?

Cables:
The main difference that I am aware of is the diameter of the cable. Most brake cables are 1.5 or 1.6mm in diameter. Most shift cables are 1.1 or 1.2mm, galvanized shifter cables are 1.3mm.
I'm sure that there is a lot of science behind the difference but I'll leave that to someone else.
One major difference in MTB vs road BRAKE cable is the different sizes and styles of head: road cables have mushroom like ends where as MTB brake cables have barrel like ends.
Shifter cable ends are the same. Although nowadays many cables come with both ends, one on each end, and you can cut off the one you're not using.

There are two basic types of cables; brake and shifter.  Brake cables are thicker, typically 1.5/1.6mm in diameter.  Brake cables come with a choice of three different heads - one for mountain/flat bar brake levers, one for Shimano road/drop bar brake levers (compatible with most non-Shimano levers), and one for Campagnolo road/drop bar brake levers.  A Shimano cable head is slightly larger than a Campy head so it may not fit into a Campy road brake.

A.  Shimano Brake Cable
B.  Campagnolo Brake Cable
C.  MountainBrake Cable
D.  Shimano Shifter Cable
E.  Campagnolo Shifter Cable

Derailleur cables are thinner, 1.1/1.2mm in diameter.  There are two
heads available on derailleur cables - Shimano and Campagnolo.  A
Shimano cable head is slightly larger than a Campy head so it may not
fit into a Campy shifter.

From Bikeman
Housing:

Just like with cables, housing comes in two different types: brake and shifter.  From the outside they may look the same - but they are in fact very different.
Brake housing is built around a wire that coils down the length of the cable.  This structure gives the great strength needed for the power generated by the brake lever.

Shifter cables see different forces so the housing is built differently.  Shifter housing is built around many length-wise running cables that make the housing 'compressionless' which aids in the crisp feel of shifting - especially needed on today's 8/9/10/11 speed cassettes.

Shifter housing also comes in two different outside diameters, 4mm and 5mm.  New bikes and shifter sets typically come with 4mm housing.  Most 4mm housing will have plastic ferrules at the ends while 5mm housing uses metal ferrules.  Here at Bikeman we recommend using 5mm shift housing.
Other variations of housing include housing made from many aluminum segments, like Nokon housing.  On the positive side the aluminum housing is stiff, lightweight, and reusable.  On the negative side there is a lot more set up time, cost, and care must be taken to be sure that the frame is protected as aluminum housing will rub paint off where it contacts the frame.
Please Note: Due to their construction, brake housing should always be used with brakes and shifter housing should always be used with shifters.  Shifter housing could fail if used on a brake (not good when you want to stop), brake housing could make that shifter feel a little dead.

Ive interchanged before on older bikes - but the key difference is gear cables must be prestretched, and less prone to subsequent stretching because of the indexing tolerances on STI or similar systems

Gear cables also tend to be a bit thicker with less cables included, and are a bit shorter


Rear hub bearing replacement Bike noob here.

I have a Quando rear hub with a busted cap?  By cap I mean the cap covering the bearings beneath the cone.

This cap is separate from the bearings.  It hold the balls in place.  Is it possible to replace this with a Sealed Bearing.  If not, am I able to purchase just the cap or must I replace the entire hub?

I can post some pictures if this isn't descriptive enough.

Summary: buying just the dust-cap is unlikely, normally you buy new cones and often a new axle, but that's because new cones are cheap. You'd only buy a new hub if something else is damaged (rare). You won't be able to fit sealed bearings.

I the picture below from the Park site is the bearing cone and cap. I assume that's the cap you're talking about?

That cap is just a dust/dirt shield and you can run without it (as you possibly have been doing) but that will shorten the life of the bearings.

Normally a bike shop will replace the bearings and cones shown at the same time, leaving the cups in the hub alone (except for cleaning). Few hubs have replaceable cups. Some shops will only stock complete axles with cones as the axle is a cheap part and it's easier to have a known-good axle every time (they sometimes bend just a little, enough to wear out bearings fast but not enough to see unless you roll the axle on a dead flat surface). Other shops stock a bunch of cones separately, but have to keep them carefully arranged in pairs since you almost never replace just one cone, and it's annoying to have to sort through the pile looking for an exact match. Another reason to use axles to hold them together :)

You won't be able to put sealed bearings into a hub not designed for them, the recess that the bearings sit is is different (one has a bearing cup, the other a cylindrical recess for a sealed bearing). If you had a lathe you might be able to cut the cups out... but it'd still be cheaper to just buy a new hub. You could possible bodge in sealed bearings buy just sliding them along the axle until they hit the cups and buying the right size to fit inside the recess in the hub, but you wouldn't get much overlap there so you'd probably break the hub in short order.

It is possible to buy/find the individual parts you are asking for.  However, you need to know the exact model # of the hub.  For cheap hubs, it is sometimes cheaper to buy an entire hub and then cannibalize the new one's axle and cups/cones/balls/etc... You'd do that to prevent having to re-lace the wheel.

Usually though, it is much cheaper to just trash the whole wheel and get a new one.  If there is something special about the rim/hub (odd size, etc..) then you may need to start raiding the LBS's trashpile for parts.

If this is the Quando rear hub I'm seeing online, the whole hub is available for under $20...  I'd just buy a new one and scavenge the parts from the new one to fix the old one and keep it around if this ever happens again.


Can I secure a 12v battery to my bicycle to charge it? And then attach a 12v horn to it? I'm from the Netherlands, so I mean a Dutch style bicycle, as in:

Then I want to attach a 12 volt horn to it. I could just put it in the basket. It doesn't necessarily need to be charged while pedaling, or it can just be partly charged, but just that it runs out of power a bit slower. Then I'd like to attach a horn to it.

Would this be possible?

I think you're on the wrong track looking at batteries because they're heavy, stealable, fragile, and bad ecologically.

Firstly, you already have an airhorn installed in the middle of your face.  Its steerable so it always sounds in the direction you're looking.
Plus it needs no batteries, and best of all it plays a customised noise, from "OI!" to "LOOK OUT!" to "STOP!"

That was a serious suggestion, but if you want a horn consider an airhorn something like http://deltacycle.com/airzound-horn
It refills from a bike pump and is lighter than a battery, plus no drag from a generator/alternator.

My own experience - I put a small 1.2AH 12V battery inside a disposable 600 ml bottle, and used a small car battery charger to charge it.   I also put a car 12V-->USB adapter in the mouth of the bottle to run my camera and cellphone.  This worked well, but loses a drink cage.

My electric bike has 3x 7AH SLA batteries.  They are in a frame built from light angle aluminium and rivets.  This replaces the main drink bottle cage and works fine, but probably overkill for your requirements.

I don't see why you couldn't do this. It's just a matter of attaching a small generator to the bike, usually driven by the wheel, and then making sure you get the right voltage output. This guide looks to be a good place to start: USB Bike Generator


Why do my tires keep losing air, even after having the tubes replaced? I had a problem a few weeks ago where my tires were flat and needed air every time I took my bike out of the garage. I brought it to the local bike shop, and they replaced my tubes.

This made a difference for a little while, but unfortunately, I seem to be back where I started. I have to fill up the tires before each ride, and then the wheels are flat after just a few minutes.

The bike is about seven years old, but I like it and this is the only problem it's ever had. Do I need a new bike, or is there something other than a bad tube that could cause this to happen?

It's not unusual for narrower tires to need pumping up every day or two, but if they really are losing air after "a few minutes" then the tubes have been holed somehow.

Did anyone check the tires for small pieces of wire, etc, sticking in them?  A tiny piece of wire can puncture a new tube within minutes.  Did anyone check the rims to make sure that the rim strips were intact, and no spoke ends were sticking out?  A missing or miss-positioned rim strip can cause a tube to puncture in short order.

At seven years old your bike is a mere adolescent, and there's no need to replace it on account of this problem.

I had the same problem, and with the use of reading glasses I finally
found a very small hole in my tire.  Use some super glue, JB Weld or similar to fill the hole in the tire.


Identifying Rear Axle Size I've got a bent QR rear axle and am looking for a replacement. Seems that these come in 9.5 and 10 mm sizes with a couple of different threadings. When I measure the OD of the threads I get around 9.8 mm – can I assume that that means I've got a 10 mm axle?

Is the right way to measure to pull the axle and measure an unthreaded section? Or does the size even matter if I'm replacing the cones and nuts with it?

That sounds like 3/8 inch.

Take the hub to a bike shop, they'll be able to pick out a compatible axle for you.


Is it acceptable to cycle towards the centre of the lane on blind corners? Some context: I live near a very congested main road, and everyone goes through the villages whenever it is blocked. If I am cycling, I have a continuous stream of cars passing me, even if they can't see the road ahead. So to prevent them overtaking (more for their safety than mine) I pull out more towards the centre.

I have seen that this answer says that it is okay to take the full lane when

  the lane isn't wide enough for a car to pass safely (to discourage dangerously close passing)

But my situation isn't about close passing, it is about passing that is dangerous to others, and consequently could be dangerous to be me.

Should I be "taking the lane" to stop people doing this, or is this not the right way to deal with it?

Just for reference, this is the road I am riding along, the worst point is half way, there is a sharp left then right.

Yes, you should absolutely be taking the lane, provided the car behind you will have time to slow down when you move to take the lane.

Passing too close, passing on a blind corner, passing that endangers others and yourself, these are all equally dangerous. This sounds like a dangerous situation all around, I highly recommend you record your ride so if someone does hit you, you can make quick work of the insurance claim.

No. If you do this you run the risk of you being "just around the corner" when a motorist enters the corner behind you and being in his path without giving him sufficient reaction time to your presence.

It's not your job to babysit other road users by using aggressive road behaviour. If it was I'd pull my car over to the fast hand lane of the motorway and set the cruise control to 70mph. (UK reference to speed limit).

The highway code in the UK does not specifically deal with this issue but it does say

  never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or
  busy roads and when riding round bends

Which to me infers that going around a corner you should present a smaller footprint, not a larger one.


Are 22mm tires too thin for commuting? I recently switched from a mountain bike to a road bike with 22mm tires for commuting.

I noticed right away that I could not do the things like hop over curbs with this new bike. I also got flats. Lots of flats. I would get 1 flat per week, and I got good at patching tires. After a few weeks of this i got Tuffy tire liners and haven't gotten a flat since. I patched up all holes in my tires from inside before putting them in (and they were a pain to put in).

I still have the following fears:

If I am going fast and I hit a small (less then 3" bump), I might get a pinch flat.
I cannot ride off a curb onto the payment without wrecking my bike.
I cannot hop curbs.
I must check my tires after every ride for glass lodged in them and take it out with tweezers.
If there is a sizeable hole (from glass) in my tire, I must use a patch kit to patch it up.
I must always ride at 120psi per tire (I weigh ~200lbs).
My stopping power compared to the mountain bike is really really bad (especially in the rain).
I must pay extreme attention to the road and go around bumps.

Should I be worried about these concerns? Are 22mm tires too thin for commuting?

Followup:

Well, after about 2 months of daily commuting on the road bike I have this to say in the defense of my earlier self:

My biggest issues turned out to be:

My bike lock which I used to attach to my bike created a lot of vibration which in turn made it impossible for me to hear any noise my bike was making. One time I rode on a flat for a few minutes because I couldn't hear/tell it was there because of the vibration/noise. This incident made me think that flats on a road bike were undetectable.
I rode clipless which scared me in traffic.

I've since started to carry my bike lock in my backpack so now I can hear my bike. I've also replaced my awesome clipless pedals with regular ones which made me feel much more comfortable in high traffic. Not fearing death actually made me faster with regular pedals in the city.

Commuting on the road bike is a blast. I love passing everyone, and now that I figured out how to properly use both brakes, I can actually stop almost as quickly as I could on my fat tired mountain bike.

Most of your fears are unfounded or way overblown.

  If I am going fast and I hit a small (less then 3" bump) I might get a pinch flat.

Pinch flats do not occur on tires that are properly inflated.

  I cannot not ride off a curb on to the payment and not wreck my bike.

I do this on both my commuter and my racing bike. Just do it gently and not violently.

  I cannot hop curbs.

I do this at slow speeds with no problem.

  I must check my tires after every ride for glass lodged in them and take it out with tweezers.

Easier is to just not ride through glass. I've never had to pick glass out of my tires after three years of commuting by bike.

  If there is a sizable hole (from glass) in my tire I must use a patch kit to patch it up.

Yeah. But again, you shouldn't be flatting this often. I made it 6,500mi on my last pair of tires.

  I must always ride at 120psi per tire (I weigh ~200lbs).

Ride at whatever the printed range is on the tire itself. Some road tires are fine at 85psi. Usually this involves topping up air once every week (for 120+psi tires) or two to three weeks (for 85psi tires).

  My stopping power compared to the mountain bike is really really bad (especially in the rain).

Your front brake should be more than capable of hurtling you over the handlebars if slammed shut at speed. Braking power will be significantly impacted in the rain, however.

  I must pay extreme attention to the road and go around bumps.

Way overblown. Don't go plowing into 5-inch potholes, sure.

If you're having this many problems, you're probably treating your road bike like a mountain bike (why are you having to hop curbs so often — it's a road bike, not a sidewalk bike) and you probably have worn out and/or bargain bin tires. Get some decent tires with puncture protection and chill out a bit.

No, because I used to commute with 22mm tires.
But, I changed to 38mm as it was a more comfortable ride.
Also, I was worried of the increase amount of tire on the road = decrease in speed but the decrease was barely noticeable after a week and the comfort level was awesome.


What to do with my old bike? I have an old, cheap, second hand bike which I use for commuting. I have to leave it on the street for 10 hours every day, it is old with damaged stickers and dirty which makes it less likely to be stolen.

It is in awful condition though. It's previous owner drove his car over it or something. It had broken brakes, a broken back derailleur and damaged front derailleur. Worst of all is something I didn't notice at first: a bent frame.

I have already spent more money in repairs than what I spent in purchasing the bike to begin with. In my last inspection I found that the back hub is also loose, I think it is related to the frame being bent. The thing is, I still want to be able to ride it to work and I don't want it to get stolen or damaged.

So what are the best options for me?

Is it a good idea for me to replace the frame? (without previous experience)

I tried to find a donor bike but I don't feel confident in buying another one second hand. I also don't feel comfortable leaving a new bike on the street for long.

If I do not easily notice a bent frame at first sight, it tells me it cannot not be that bad to compromise the frame integrity. When you ride the bike, do you feel it handling weird, or shaky? if it doesn't, then I would conclude the bent frame is inconsequential. Personally, one of my bikes has a bent frame which I didn't noticed it for the first few months. Been riding it for 4 years since then and it's never been issue in handling or otherwise and I've ridden in long rides (15-20+ miles) and at considerable speeds (17-19 mph)

The loose hub, as it has been mentioned before, it could as easy as tightening the bearings cups or as bad as needing a new hub. Without a video or personally inspecting it, it hard to give proper advice.

If the frame is toasted, I would consider two options: donate it to a bike co-op so it can be used for spare parts; or find a similar bike on CL and keep this one for spare parts.

Also, a bike co-op will work with you to either fix your bike or allow you to pick another one in exchange for the one you have.

http://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/diy/7-ways-to-reuse-old-bike-tubes/belt
this website maybe can help you~


What type of bicycle parking rack should my company install? Recently there are many people coming by bicycle to our company.

I would like to solve the problem about where they should park their bikes.

Do you have any suggestion about what type of bike racks are suitable for us?

As someone who rides their bike everywhere I have experienced a great many types of bike rack. In my opinion the best choice is a Sheffield Stand.

  Image Copyright David Wright CC BY-SA 2.0
  (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0), via Wikimedia Commons

They are cheap, simple and readily available to purchase. When installing them make sure they are far enough apart so that riders have enough room to comfortably part and lock their bike.

b|s|b    b|s|b
i|t|i pe i|t|i
k|a|k rs k|a|k
e|n|e on e|n|e
 |d|      |d|

As others have said, avoid anything that holds the wheels. These provide poor locking options and don't easily accommodate bikes with different sizes of tyre. They can also damage rims and spokes.

(update)
You can checkout some design under wikipedia bicycle parking rack page.

the easiest way is google "buy bicycle parking rack".

Depends on region, there may not be "ready made" for mass bicycle parking near your local bicycle shop. You need to find workshop that fabricate those rack/stand/pole/etc.


What is a good camera arrangement for city riding? I would like to have continuous camera coverage while commuting on city streets, in order to have evidence in any collision.  I have been experimenting with an ATC3K mounted on the pannier rack, facing backwards.  At 15 fps on a 2Gb SD card, the maximum it can use, it provides about an hour to 90 minutes of footage.  I manually stop and start it at the beginning and ending of each ride.

Pros

The picture quality is adequate at 640x480.
It cost about $100

Cons

The chain and freewheel clatter mask any other sounds.
The control screen is hard to see and the buttons, which are under a water-resistant rubber cover, are hard to press.  As a result, it takes about a minute of button mashing to erase the SD card.
Fairly narrow field of view.
Full coverage would need two cameras, and twice the amount of fussing, before and after each ride.

What cameras and mounting arrangements might be better?

I've had good success with the Go Pro cameras for whitewater kayaking. We generally mount them on our helmets. They stand up to quite a beating and you can get more on a card than the camera you ask about above.

If you can mount it on your helmet then it will be pointing where you look and I think you'll have better success getting shots of any collision since you're often looking at it as it happens.

Here's a blog of someone doing the same thing on his daily commute. http://cranks-on-cam.com/ Looks like he's using a Drift Inovation (http://www.driftinnovation.com/x170-action-camera.php) and there is a video of his mount on the gear page.

I haven't yet used it, but Rideye seems to be a good and inexpensive system:

http://www.rideye.com/store/rideye

the cheaper version costs $99
waterproof
~10 hours battery life
full HD resolution
can store 1.5 or 5 hours of video (depending on the memory size)
ready to go out of the box, no tinkering needed
170º field of view
designed specifically to serve as a "black box" for your bike


What to Look for In Gloves for Winter Commuting We live in Buffalo, NY where winters are harsh. My husband rides early in the morning and afternoon about 6 miles each way. The temperature is often below freezing, especially early in the morning – wind and snow make the cold worse and make his hands very wet. He says he arrives at work every morning with numb fingers and can't type for the first 20 minutes or so until they thaw.

I want to buy him some gloves that will keep his hands warm in the conditions he deals with. What should I be looking for? What features make a good glove for winter commuting in a cold, wet climate?

You'll need gloves that allow you to still hold the bars and use the brakes and shifters. Standard mittens don't work well since you have to grab the brake with all your fingers.

Durable waterproof ski gloves with five fingers are one of the best options, especially those which come with a hand warmer pocket for extra warmth capability. Some folks prefer lobster style gloves since they are split and allow you to wrap two fingers around the bars and two on the brake on a flat bar setup. They still suffer a bit when using STI shifters, but they are usable.

Gloves that have a separate outer an inner layer are very helpful for longer duration riding as you can keep a set of dry liners handy to swap out if your hands sweat a lot, since moisture will transfer cold from the liner to your fingers. I've found this a lifesaver on long rides where my hands begin to freeze up. If using on commutes, it's nice to have separate liners for to and from trips, in case your liners don't dry through the day.

For extra cold conditions, a lot of people prefer to combine thinner gloves with pogies / bar mitts. These provide a lot of wind shielding as well as some insulation, enabling you to forgo super heavy gloves.  They are available for both drop bar and flat bar setups, but they are more optimal on flat bars.

Some popular brands of gloves to check out are:
45nrth - See Sturmfist gloves (some of the best deep winter cycling gear)
Pearl Izumi - See Pro Softshell Lobster Glove (one peice, makes layering hard)
Planet Bike - See Borealis Glove (lobster style, separate liner)
Swany - See X-change Gloves (some of the best ski gloves, also awesome for winter cycling)

Popular Pogies:
45nrth Cobrafist (Flat bar only)
Revelate Designs (flat bars and jones loop bar compatible models)
Dogwood Designs Pogies (Flat bar only)
Barmitts (Both Flag bar and drop bar models, simple neoprene design)
AMF Threadworms Moose Mitts (Drop bar and flat bar models available)

I always find mittens way warmer than gloves.
In some cases I even get my thumb out of its own area and tuck it in with the rest of the hand to keep it warm.

I still go for skiing mittens, which are pretty good wind and waterproof.


Advice on tyres for a 109 mile charity cycle A friend and i have decided we want to cycle between our favourite football team's stadium for charity. We are starting at Wolverhampton and finishing at Bristol with a total distance of 109 miles.

We currently have cheap Btwin mountain bikes from Decathlon and plan to swap for a slightly thinner tyre. Our theory is that it will make pedaling slightly easier for us as we assume the majority of the trip will be road riding.

The current tyres we have on our bikes are 26 x 2.0.

I have been looking at Continental Ride Tours at 26x1.75 would these fit and do you think they would be good? Not very clued up on bikes to be honest.

Thanks

Neil

Variations in this question must be one of the most asked on this site, but I can't find a good question and answer to direct you to, so I'll just answer it.

There are many rim width to tire width charts that can be looked up on the Internet. An example is on this Sheldon Brown page. It's highly unlikely that the tires supplied with the bikes are at the narrowest limit of the rims, so 1.5" tires will be fine.

If you are looking to decrease rolling resistance, go for a road oriented tire with minimal tread rather than an on/off road hybrid. Inflate to the upper end of the specified pressure range.

It goes without saying that you should have the bikes checked over and make sure the brakes and gears are properly adjusted. Also, make sure the drivetrain is super clean and properly lubed - that does actually net an improvement in efficiency.

If you're on mountain bikes, I'd suggest Maxxis Hookworms. Yeah, they are not narrower than anything you are currently running, they are much wider. You can pump them up to 50 psi (or more but I like 50 as a max) and do amazingly well on the street, while still having plenty of grip on the road. And they work really well off road too down around 30 psi. They are a heavy duty tire that will take years to wear out.

Oh also, a lot of people think 2.5's won't fit on their bikes, but I have yet to ever come across a bike that couldn't fit hookworms with plenty of room to spare. Advertised tire widths are random voodoo.


What is the quantifiable benefit of compressionless brake housing? If you had a compressionless setup (cable disc for example) that you measured gave you 100 braking units (whatever unit that would be) when the lever was maximally activated, what would be the number of braking units for a coiled housing setup?
E.g. it would only be 85 braking units because the housing absorbs the rest of the lever activation?
Does coiled housing have a linear response to being compressed, or once it's been compressed a certain amount does it effectively act as compressionless housing from then on, like a concertina of paper that you can't squash down any further?
Would the 'spongey feel' that people talk about be captured in these measurements, or is that something else on top?

It's about distance, not force. Coil housing is not at all impaired in its ability to transmit force once any distance between its coils has been taken up (so no to your second question.) On any rim brake that doesn't have egregious bends, the practical difference between compressionless and coil housing is marginal. It's a little stiffer and more responsive feeling, but the advantages of it are small and possibly outweighed by the increased fragility, installation hassle, and/or expense of compressionless. On a mechanical disc, or a rim brake system that forces egregious bends in the housing, it's a different story.
Total pad gap on a V-brake or dual pivot caliper is around 5mm. On a mechanical disc it's 0.8-1mm. Yet the lever throw powering both is the same; the needs of a brake lever designed for a human hand doesn't change between the two. This demonstrates that in terms of lever movement to pad movement, mechanical disc brakes run at about a 5 times greater leverage ratio, or mechanical advantage. You have a great big lever throw producing a very small amount of movement. That's how disc brakes are powerful despite a rotor being such a smaller circle than a rim. Mechanical discs can have problems with being difficult to set up in a way where the rider doesn't run out of lever travel, and since compressionless helps conserve lever movement by eliminating housing compression, it is good to use in this role and is often one of the main ways of helping out a bike that is having issues with the levers bottoming. This is often most pronounced on long continuous rear brake housing runs, which most disc bikes have.
The effect of coil housing creating wasted lever movement becomes much more pronounced whenever there are tight bends in the housing path, which will cause the gaps between the coils to open up and need to be closed again by the braking force. The helical nature of the individual strand path in braided compressionless brake housing mitigates this effect almost entirely in most cases on bikes. The same effect can sometimes be used to create good brake feel on bikes with brake routing that forces awkward bends.
It is worth pointing out that compressionless brake housing does have a dark side compared to coil. Coil housing, being made of thick steel, is a very robust design that is much more able to shake off or only be incrementally affected by damage, abrasion, kinks, and material degradation. Compressionless brake housing is something of a glass cannon in comparison; it's a bunch of steel wires that fundamentally don't want to stay together and resist the forces they're being put under, but are able to do so because of the standout properties of the layer of kevlar fabric that constrains them. The system is also wholly reliant on the right special ferrules being used to keep wires from pulling through. Compressionless brake housing is safe, more than reliable enough for bikes that are reasonably maintained, and not prone to failing suddenly when it does fail, but it is less age- and abuse-resistant than coil.
EDIT: As ojs pointed out in the comments, I had the part about the effect of compression being amplified 5x wrong, which I initially wrote. I've edited this answer to be something I can stand by, but see that it was likely accepted on the basis of incorrect reasoning, so I'm open to it being taken down or un-accepted as the answer, neither of which I can do.

There are two types of mechanical brakes: short pull and long pull. Short pull brakes include cantilevers and caliper brakes, plus some mechanical disc brakes. Long pull brakes include V brakes plus some mechanical disc brakes.
Short pull has less cable pulled, but the force in the cable is larger so the product of force and cable travel is the same for both pull types.
The type of outer cable traditionally used for mechanical brakes is coiled steel outer cable. It withstands the large braking forces. The outer cable types used for shifting are sometimes called compressionless housing, but this is an incorrect term. Instead, they should be called constant-length housing because the length of the housing does not change if the bending radius of the housing changes. This property is important for shifting because it is what allows you to use handlebar mounted shifters. Otherwise the turning of handlebars would affect the gear you're using.
Good manufacturers also divide the coiled steel housing class for different brake types: short-pull brakes and long-pull brakes. For example, Shimano has SLR housing for short-pull brakes and M-system housing for long-pull brakes.
The short-pull housing has been optimized to be dimensionally stable even if the forces transmitted by the cables are large.
The long-pull housing has been optimized to cause as little cable friction as possible. This is important, because the mechanical advantage of long-pull brake levers is such that it would cause cable friction to deteriorate braking feel.
You probably can substitute short-pull housing for long-pull brakes but the braking feel can be less than optimal. Substituting long-pull housing for short-pull brakes probably works for lightweight riders or riders not having strong fingers. However, a strong-fingered heavy rider could exceed the design forces of long-pull housing if used with short-pull brakes. So that's why riders needing large braking forces shouldn't use long-pull housing on short-pull brakes.
I don't understand why anyone would like to use constant-length ("compressionless") housing on any brake.


How to prevent wrist pain on road bikes? When I started bike-commuting with my road bike I developed chronic pain in my wrists. It probably took a year to go away, and now I have been free of complaints for several years. My wife just started bike-commuting with her road bike and she started to complain about painful wrists as well. I assume this has to do with holding weak wrists at an angle for an extended period of time. I was thinking about pointing her handlebars downward a bit, but am worried that she will slide off the grips mounted to the top of the handle bar (I don't know what those are called...) when she rides with her hands above the bar and has to brake abruptly. Something else we were thinking about trying is wrapping her wrists with elastic bandages, but we weren't sure if we were going to exacerbate or at least prolong the problem, since she would probably use her wrist muscles less.

I switched bikes a year ago, and I noticed on my rides (50km - 70km) at the time that I had some numbness / cramp / pain in my hands and wrists, it was so bad on some rides that I need two hands to change gear.  The bike had slightly different geometry than my previous road bike.  I now ride frequently 100km and even up to 180km with little or no pain.

Here's what I did and what changed:

1) I took the bike to my LBS and asked them if there was something they could do.  The adjusted the shifters outwards so that I wasn't stretching so far to change gear. A good bike fit may be the only solution you need.

2) Good gloves with good padding in the right place, to prevent putting too much pressure on the nerves that run through your palm.

3) rotating hand position, on a road bike you have 3 (or possibly more ) hand positions.  Use them.  They are not always practical in every situation but you can often switch from the drops to the hoods or vice versa on the flat, and the hood to the tops or vice versa on climbs.  This change in position will help with cramping.

4) finger clenches and stretches.  As soon as I start to feel my wrists or fingers getting tired I take one hand at a time off the handlebars (where it is safe to do so) and clench and stretch my fingers 5-10 times.

5) Hold the handle bars loosely.  My main problem was that I was gripping the handlebars way too tightly.  If you relax your grip to the loosest possible you will reduce cramp and reduce the effect of vibrations from small bumps and rough road surfaces.  This is especially important for long fast downhills.  I would grip on for dear life (doing about 60kmph - 75kmph) clearly you want a harder grip as even small bumps can be dangerous, but squeezing very hard on the handlebars will give you cramp in no time at all.  Also when braking on the down hills its better to pump the brakes rather that keep them on the whole time.

All this takes practice and I am sure that the muscles in my wrists got used to the abuse they were getting too.  In the end I am fine.

This gets worse if you fill the front tire with air until it's rock hard.
A cheap fix is to obtain a length of vinyl HVAC foam tube and cut two 5 inch lengths then slip the lengths over the hand grips.


Can I fix an inner tube if the valve has been pushed inside? I can't pump my bike tire because the valve of the inner tube has been pushed inside, where its not visible anymore. Is there a possible way for me to fix this or should I buy a new inner tube?

Thanks for the photo! This makes it clearer that your valve body didn’t fall into the wheel rim, rather your presta valve internal valve shaft either fell off or fell into the tube body.

Unlike the photo above, it looks like you have a one piece valve so the core isn’t normally removable (you can’t unscrew the part of the valve pictured above with the words unscrew here) — but if you were to unscrew the thumbscrew too far the inner valve shaft itself  could fall into the inside of the tube.

You’ll need a new thumbscrew at minimum but it might be very hard to get the thin internal valve shaft back up into the valve body properly. Unlike a tube with a replaceable core, I don’t think you can replace the core if you can’t rethread the valve shaft  from inside.

In many ways, it’ll be easier to just replace the whole inner. They are cheap for a reason.

If this ever occurs, make sure to remove the inner tube out of the tire and wheel. Next, locate the inner shale valve (long copper screw) by touching the inner tube and feeling where it is. After, reinsert it into the main body. Finally, it may be difficult at first to locate and attempt to insert it however if I can do it so can you! Don’t waste your money on buying a new inner tube. This issue can be fix within minutes. Thank you!


Why is there a stitched hole in the back pocket of my new jersey? I just finished a charity ride and found that the brand new jersey bought for it has a hole in the back center pocket.  It is neatly cut, with stitching around it to prevent fraying, so I'm sure it is a feature rather than a defect.  What is the intended purpose?

My best guess is the hole would allow a headphone cable to run down the collar, through the inside of the shirt, and into the pocket.

For some sort of cord to make life easier.


Charging eBike Battery with Solar I need some advice / info on solar charging an eBike battery. We have two RadRovers from Rad Power Bikes. They are powered with a Panasonic Dolphin 48V, 11.6Ah Lithium-Ion battery https://www.radpowerbikes.com/collections/replacement-parts/products/radrover-battery-pack.

We are planing a road trip from the North West US down south and would like to extend the range of the bikes. The specs say that the range is between 20 and 40 miles depending on how you ride. We are planning on using the low pedal-assist setting as much as possible, so we should be able to get to 40 miles or above.

We are bringing a second battery so we should be able to count on 70 to 80 miles a day. With that said, I’d like to rig up a solar set up to extend our range even further. Ideally, we’d have it set up so that the solar panel is plugged directly into the battery being used to extend the range.

I have found these 100w folding solar panel that will work for us https://www.amazon.com/dp/B071YP7X4F/ref=psdc_2236628011_t3_B01M28W7KR.

We can attach this to the rear of the bike with a frame. However, the panel will be fixed in a flat horizontal position, and will not always be in direct sunlight, but it’ll still be better than nothing I figure. If we can get just a little extra boost in between plugging in for a recharge, its worth it. My question is, is it possible for us to plug directly into the battery that is currently powering the bike? If not I’ll just charge the spare battery while in transit, but the first option is preferred. Also, what additional equipment do I need to achieve this? I know I need a controller, but I am not familiar with how this works exactly. A link to an ideal controller would be much appreciated.

Finally, if I then want to change the solar charger over to this laptop battery to charge it on occasion https://www.voltaicsystems.com/v72, would this same controller be used? How would this work.

I really appreciate any advice and info you can give us.

A 100 watt solar panel is nominal watts under ideal situations. You'll be lucky to get 25 watts/hr tied to the back of your bike - and this would be only for a few hours of the day, from 11a to 3p.

Given that your bike is likely using at least 100-200 watts/hr even on low pedal assist, you're only going to gain 5-10% more range over the entire day. From experience, even with low pedal assist, its highly unlikely you'll get anywhere near the maximum (or even middle) advertised range of the ebike.

There is a further complication that  your battery management system won't allow you to charge while biking. Many if not most don't.  So you can only charge the spare pack and you'll have to figure out how to convert the solar panel to the right D.C. voltage and amperage for your charger. If you overcharge or overvolt, a poorly design lithium pack can go up in flames.

It'd be much easier and safer logistically to just bring another spare battery pack or two. I assume you'll be pulling trailers and as a result your mileage will be even further reduced but it means you can carry more. Just load up your trailer with spare packs and bring multiple chargers. Forget solar, it's not worth the hassle. The one exception would be to use solar to charge your iPhone/iPad and other electronic devices -- it's relatively easy to find small solar chargers that have USB leads.

Well it is the end of 2020 and now there are solar panels Panasonic VBHN325KA03  for around $350 that will do
Electrical
Watts (STC) 325 W
Max Power Voltage (VMPP)    59.2 V
Max Power Current (IMPP)    5.50 A
Open Circuit Voltage (VOC)  70.9 V
Short Circuit Current (ISC) 5.94 A
Max System Voltage (UL) DC 600 V
Warranty
25 Year product warranty, 90% output
25 years, 90.76% output
In 2013 a 7800 KM solar bike race took place from France to Kazakhstan with only solar power and pedaling.   So we should be able to power most bikes with solar now in 2020.


Troubleshooting a bent mech hanger I think I bent the mech hanger (right term?) on my Schwinn MTB. Now changing gears is hard. I'm trying to better understand my options. What I understand so far as to what I can do:

Look for a new mech hanger for this make/model
Try un-bend (using force) to correctly align hanger

From my visual inspection, the bend looks slight, yet has a big impact on the gear. A few pics:

I'm biased towards a do-it-yourself solution, if possible. Thank-you.

It looks like both the Hangar and the attachment from the rear mech to the hangar are bent?
You could try to straighten yourself with pliers or a small wrench but I would suggest a visit to the LBS who will use a Hangar Alignment Tool

http://www.parktool.com/product/derailleur-hanger-alignment-gauge-dag-2-2?category=Frame%20&%20Fork

With a bent hangar you will never have smooth, crisp shifting at all.
That chain needs a degrease by the looks of the first photo. If it's an old chain, it may have "chain stretch" which will also affect shifting and start to ruin your cassette. Ask the LBS to check the chain length as well?


Cyclometer interference from car detection loops? I've noticed several times lately when stopping at an intersection with a car detection loop that my wireless cyclometer (an Atom 4.0) exhibits some strange behavior. It continues to think I'm moving (as indicated by a triangle icon), the distance increases (by a tenth of a mile every few seconds), the average speed goes up rapidly (in accordance with the distance increase), but the current speed appears stuck at whatever the last real reading was, and the maximum speed is unaffected.

I suspect it's to do with the car detection loops in the pavement, since the only other electronic things on my bike are lights, and I've seen this with them off. Is this how interference might present itself in the cyclometer? Are the loops indeed a probable source? Can I try to shield something to avoid it?

The car induction loop seems to be the most likely culprit. Their operation rely on an induction coil being buried under the street in front of the lights [1]. When it detects a car, or for that matter your metal bike, as a result its magnetic field is increased. This magnetic field is used for operation of the lights, but its conceivable that the field will affect the operation of your wireless comp. It's questionable if it would affect a wired computer, as it would be shielded with the connecting cable.

When passing through the door in my local bike shop with my bike while having my cyclocomputer fitted I also see the same affect. This time its down to the anti-theft magnetic detection loops fitted at the door. [2]

I suppose the solution is to fit a wired comp instead. Or else make sure you stay well back from/in front of the lights.

[1] http://auto.howstuffworks.com/car-driving-safety/safety-regulatory-devices/question234.htm

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_article_surveillance#Magnetic_systems

I've found the same thing happens to me when using the wireless ones.  Was never sure if it was the fact my wife was riding so close to me and we had cross talk happening, as she has the same model as me.  Figured that if my reciever was picking up my transmitter and her's slightly later then I would start seeing a double in my speed, which is sort of what I have seen.

The idea of it being the induction loops never occured to me...as I don't fully understand the circuit being used for the sensor I'll reserve judgement on that.


Bike Pedal Falling Off While riding her bike my daughter's pedal came off. It appears to be stripped. This has happened to her with a total of three bikes. What could be causing this to happen?

The only time I've seen pedals in a newish bike strip out of the crank was when the mechanic who assembled the bike overtightens the pedals (the mechanic was a younger me, but you live and you learn.) Often, people will forget that left pedals are left-hand threaded and will strip them out when they try to remove them.

The mechanical motion of pedaling causes metal-metal mating surfaces to fret - microscopic motion back and forth causing noticeable wear. If this were a bike from the 70's with aluminum cranks it wouldn't be a surprising failure mechanism. However, since these are new bikes, the most likely explanation is that who ever assembled these bikes tightened the pedals too much. There is no way a child could be riding the bicycle enough to cause a pedal to strip out. To have it happen three times is incredibly unlikely, though.

I'd avoid buying department store bikes and refer to your local bike shop for any repairs or replacements.

I think it is a matter of how well the person that assembled the bikes tightend the pedals. Sometimes, assemblers do not tighten some bolts enough, for example, or they may tighten them unequally. So accidents occur while riding...

Please check the whole bike before getting out of the store, because sometimes, they think that we are completely stupid and do stuff like this. Majority of them only care about our money. There are some exceptions, but sadly they are very rare.


Finding DISTANCES on longer bike/hike paths I want to bike along the Oxford Canal for several days.  I need a way to determine distances to plan for where to sleep and eat.

Mapping apps tend to tell you where to go instead of telling you about where you decide to go.

Are there any websites or apps¹ that make it easy to determine the distance along a path I will indicate?

¹I prefer IOS, but I do have an Android device.

I use Google maps (set to 'cycling mode') and Strava to plan routes. Both try to find the 'best' route between the start and end points but allow fine control of the route by setting intermediate waypoints.

Each will give you details of the route including distance and a gradient profile.

Google maps tends to find routes based on cyclepaths, bike friendly roads and trails. Strava uses its 'heat map' built up from recorded rides. Both have their pros and cons.  It can be a bit of a struggle to get both Google maps and Strava to adhere to a specific route, but it is doable with judicious placement of waypoints. Strava can be made a little more controllable by turning the 'use popularity' option off.

I tend to use Strava if I want to upload the route to my Wahoo bike computer app.

I've not used RideWithGPS but I assume it has the same fine control over route planning.

If it's only distances you want why not do it the old fashioned way - use the appropriate Ordnance Survey map, piece of paper to measure the distance and then get accurate distance from the scale shown on the map. Pretty certain you could do it in 5 minutes, and you get a nice map to look at to plan other excursions whilst you're having a pint along the way. Think the cost for an Explorer edition (1:25000 scale) is less than UK£10, and if bought online you get a code to download same map to your phone...

As @davidricherby states, absolute accuracy probably isn't required. If you plot it to be 25M, riding at a leisurely 10mph takes you roughly 2 1/2 hours. If it turns out to be 20 or 30 miles, you're only +/- 30 minutes.


how do i stop my Formula disk brakes from squealing I have seen a number of posts about stopping discs from squealing, but mine don't always squeal, when the squealing starts it doesn't stop (as if something has worn off) and it's not worn out pads.

Is it true that some makes and models of discs just squeal? If so, time to change brake manufacturer?

Is it true that different compound pads will make the squealing stop?

Short answer is don't throw out you brakes just yet and a different material MIGHT make the squealing stop.

What you are experiencing is quite typical. Mine are really bad sometimes if they are wet or have dust on them. A few max effort stops fixes it. Steps to address, in a rough order based on cost and hassle factor, and no guarantee of success...

Find a nice steep down hill and do a half dozen or more max effort stops from the fastest speed to can get up to. (safety warning bla bla bla). If that does not work, repeat after emptying you water bottle over the disc.
Realign the brake calipers
Clean the discs with meths/white petrol etc

if you can be bothered trying it, 'burn' the pads
polish the discs and pads with a very fine (400 or 600) wet and dry sand paper

Replace the pads with Organic ones.
Replace the disc rotors
I'm out of suggestion, buy some ear plugs......

Your brakes are leaking fluid, it's getting on the pads. Simple.


Presta valve won't let air in on a new tube During a ride I had a flat tire and used a brand new Joe's tube with sealant.
For the first time in many years of riding i was not able to pump air in. It appears that the pin inside the valve won't go in to let air flow. I've tried also with the tube out of the wheel but no luck.

I suspect strongly that the valve is gummed up with sealant.  From the photo it looks like you may be able to remove the "core" of the valve.  That would allow you to either clean it, or replace it.   The core is the silver part that is screwed into the brassy looking part.

Otherwise, if you can't blow the blockage into the tube with a pump, and the tube wont deflate through the valve if you hold it open, then it's time for a new tube.

For what it's worth, tubeless tires with sealant work much better than tubes with sealant.  They do sometimes suffer this problem too, but in that case you can remove the valve completely and clear it by poking a spoke, nail, or stick through it.

The presta valve has a tube, a threaded pin and a lock nut.
Your pin won't move down and you hit it with the pump - and rightly so!
Try lubricating the pin with WD40 - ensure the locknut (silver in your pic) is unscrewed all the way (lefty - loosey, righty - tighty!)
The WD40 may dissolve any 'gunk' that is stopping the pin from moving down under air (or hammer) pressure.
Otherwise, time for a new tube!


Do higher speed crashes result in less serious injuries. I have heard that the severity of injuries tend to decrease while riding a road bike at high speed. An instance of high speed would be like those in the Tour de France.

The reasoning behind this idea is "enough" speed allows the cyclist to "roll" upon landing thus decreasing the chance of breaking bones for example.

This seems contrary to my basic knowledge of physics and momentum, so, is it true?

In "Epidemiology of bicycle injuries and risk factors for serious injury" by Frederick P Rivara, Diane C Thompson, and Robert S Thompson, the authors gave a questionnaire to 3,390 bicycle riders who had attended a hospital emergency department in the Seattle area.

They found that cyclists involved in a crash at a speed greater than 15 miles per hour were 1.4 times as likely to have a "severe" injury (defined as an injury severity score greater than 8) as cyclists involved in a crash at a speed of 15 miles per hour or less. The 95% confidence interval was 1.0 to 1.9.

(Caveats: 1. It seems strange to me that the authors only reported odds ratios, when they apparently had the data to compute effect sizes too. 2. The fast cyclists differ systematically from the slower cyclists: the odds ratio fell to 1.2 when other factors in the study were controlled for. 3. It's Rivara, Thompson and Thompson.)

ive read every answer here. and none of them reflect actual experience riding a bicycle and getting into multiple accidents on them. i have. i have also SEEN multiple accidents happen.

RIDING ON CITY STREET IN MANHATTAN AND BROOKLYN ; the reality is that the biggest determining factor of how bad your injuries are is HOW YOU FALL OFF YOUR BIKE AND WHAT YOU FALL INTO. it is that simple.

and for this reason, my experience reflects the fact that that higher speeds ensure you fall off your bike in a manner that is FAR LESS CONTROLLED AND MORE SLOPPY. thus, higher speeds ensure your 'fall' is worse, which is entirely the opposite of the thesis that your fall is better if you are faster because you can 'roll'. thats utter nonsense.

if you are going at a slower speed you have a few more microseconds or milliseconds to adjust your body and torso and DIRECTION of your fall. in particular, you put your hands out in front to shield your head, and reflexively try and protect your head. apart from those reflexes, you control the 'wobble' of your bike in a fall that doesn't occur smoothly--many falls occur due to a GRAZING of the bicyle hitting something from the side lightly, including pedestrians, a light knock from a car, hitting a hard pothole, sliding over leaves or a grating that destabilizes your balance . in that type of accident you have like 1/3 of a full second as you try and stabilize your handlebars to no effect. however, if you are going slower the result is the wobble lasts longer and you can sometimes control the direction of the fall, or even turn a 'fall' into a 'slide out' which i have done many times. this means you fall down on your side but in a relatively controlled manner which results in scrapes and scratches and maybe a bruise but nothing broken and no major hard impact as if you are thrown onto the ground.

also in relatively common 'dooring' situations where are a vehicle door opens directly in front of your path, you have just a bit more time to swerve away from the window of the door infront of you, and fall away from the door as opposed to falling through it with your entire body. more importantly at slower speeds, you have a better chance of being able to stop short by slamming your brakes without an accident.

furthermore, there is the obvious reality that hittting an object , any object, at higher speed results in more force upon impact.

finally, the most overlooked reality is that going at a slower speed allows you to avoid FAR MORE accidents and allows others to avoid getting into accidents with you, particularly pedestrians who may otherwise not see you because they are not paying attention at all, or because you aren't paying attention to them.

if there is ONE and only ONE rule for cycling other than 'pay attention at all times' it is , RIDE SLOWLY. it is NOT 'wear a helmet'. no. ride slowly.

the best sped for a bicycle is under 14 miles an hour. at 12 miles an hour, you are basically just strolling around speed on a bike. In my experience most bicycle accidents occur between cyclists and pedestrians running into the street , or between cyclists and vehicle Doors, or between cyclists and potholes/uneven streets or hidden obstacles, slippery things on the street. for all of these most common causes of falls, speed greatly affects the outcome of both the likelihood of the accident occurring, and the results of the accident.


Spending up to 200 dollars now on a bike for slow rides on gravel roads I'm a dad with a kid just getting old enough that we can bike around together. I've been using a 10 dollar bike I got from a garage sale but it's just rusty junk at this point. Our other kid is still going to need to be in a back mounted seat for another year or two so I don't want to bother investing in a nice bike for me that is going to get busted up just from the mounting of the child seat.

So if I only have 200 dollars at most to put into a bike, what type of bike is least bad when it's cheap? I've picked up that the "full suspension" bikes are just horrible on the cheap bikes (and that's all that my Walmart seems to have), but what about the full body solid road type bikes? I'll be spending 95% of the time just piddling around on gravel roads and maybe light gravel trails. Nothing on mountains but also no need for real speed.

I'd recommend another used bike.  It might take some time to find a suitable one that fits your budget, but garage sales, thrift stores, and maybe even Craig's list are good places to find good used bikes that would fit in your budget.

A couple of recommendations:

Don't buy a bike without seeing it.
Bring a set of decent tools to do a good inspection (Don't use cheap tools on someone else's bike...)
Loosen and remove the seat post, look inside for bad rust/corrosion
Do ALL the parts that are supposed to rotate/move smoothly? (A rusty chain is no big deal - it can be replaced, but count that in your budget)
See if you can loosen the pedals from the crankset
Remove and replace the wheels - you're going to have to replace tires and tubes eventually...
Check cables and brake pads (no big deal, they might well need to be replaced, but count that in your budget)
Loosen the handlebars and headset

Obviously, you'll have to be able to return the bike to its original condition.

If you can't do any of that without damaging the bike, it's not a good bike to buy.  For example, if you can't get the seat post, pedals, or headset loose, there's probably way too much corrosion or rust.

If the seller doesn't want you to check out the bike like that, don't buy it.

You can get a perfectly good bike at Walmart for $89.

https://www.walmart.com/ip/26-Roadmaster-Granite-Peak-Men-s-Mountain-Bike-Black/55376950

Get the 3 year warranty for $11. If something breaks in 3 years, Walmart will give you another new bike. If not, you can sell it for $10 at a tag sale.

This particular bike has front springs, but you will never notice they are there unless you jump off a ramp.