How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

bicycle-forum.net
Promoting biking discussion.

Main

Date: 08 Nov 2006 04:42:02
From: Ken Aston
Subject: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

Thanks to everyone's help in my earlier thread at
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.misc/browse_thread/thread/03579fe6ffbae2fe/26b50605296a2a17#26b50605296a2a17
I am now eager to put away my discount bike in the basement and buy a
good quality bike.

In particular I am looking into a in Lucas Valley
http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_lucas_valley.html
or a in Fairfax:
http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_fairfax.html

What do you think about these bikes for my purpose? I plan to ride it
about 20 miles a day on regular roads in the city. Since I am wearing a
suit once in a while, I would like to attach full length light-weight
fenders and a simple chain guard, just one extra ring next to the
pedals (is it possible?).

The main purpose is riding in the city but next summer I want to do a
month-long bicycle trip. Do you think I can attach front and rear racks
and go on the road with the extra weight? I wonder if those thin tyres
will be OK. If yes, it would be perfect, as a like to move on fast. Or
should I get a seperate bike for the road trip?

What do you think?

Ken Aston

Date: 14 Nov 2006 07:38:41
From: landotter
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

SMS wrote:

> For commuting, get a Breezer Uptown
> ("http://www.breezerbikes.com/bike_details.cfm?bikeType=town&frame=d&bike=uptown").
> This is one of the only bicycles available in the U.S. that has a real
> chaingguard.

As nice as the Breezer is, the chainguard is not real. It's an object
shaped like a chainguard with crappy little plastic clips that'll break
first time you remove the rear wheel or change the chain.

Date: 14 Nov 2006 08:14:51
From: SMS
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than

landotter wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>
>> For commuting, get a Breezer Uptown
>> ("http://www.breezerbikes.com/bike_details.cfm?bikeType=town&frame=d&bike=uptown").
>> This is one of the only bicycles available in the U.S. that has a real
>> chaingguard.
>
> As nice as the Breezer is, the chainguard is not real. It's an object
> shaped like a chainguard with crappy little plastic clips that'll break
> first time you remove the rear wheel or change the chain.

If it does break, you can at least get a replacement from Breezer, or
modify it to use real clamps.

Date: 14 Nov 2006 03:17:22
From: SMS
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than

Ken Aston wrote:
> Thanks to everyone's help in my earlier thread at
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.misc/browse_thread/thread/03579fe6ffbae2fe/26b50605296a2a17#26b50605296a2a17
> I am now eager to put away my discount bike in the basement and buy a
> good quality bike.
>
> In particular I am looking into a in Lucas Valley
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_lucas_valley.html
> or a in Fairfax:
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_fairfax.html
>
> What do you think about these bikes for my purpose? I plan to ride it
> about 20 miles a day on regular roads in the city. Since I am wearing a
> suit once in a while, I would like to attach full length light-weight
> fenders and a simple chain guard, just one extra ring next to the
> pedals (is it possible?).
>
> The main purpose is riding in the city but next summer I want to do a
> month-long bicycle trip. Do you think I can attach front and rear racks
> and go on the road with the extra weight? I wonder if those thin tyres
> will be OK. If yes, it would be perfect, as a like to move on fast. Or
> should I get a seperate bike for the road trip?
>
> What do you think?

For commuting, get a Breezer Uptown
("http://www.breezerbikes.com/bike_details.cfm?bikeType=town&frame=d&bike=uptown").
This is one of the only bicycles available in the U.S. that has a real
chaingguard.

For touring, you'll want a true touring bicycle with stronger wheels,
drop bars, and full racks.

Date: 10 Nov 2006 07:42:15
From:
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

k Hickey wrote:
>
> Amen (see, I can agree with Frank). ;-)

In the past two or three days, I've noticed lots of new "agreemenent."
People now agree there were no WMDs! And GWB agreed that Rummy wasn't
infallible! And suddenly, W's agreeing that we need cooperation
between parties!

Too bad this didn't happen a few trillion dollars ago. And too bad
Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove hadn't merely been in charge of fender
design, with GWB being the fender salesman. Mistakes there _are_
infinitely easier to fix.

Sorry, k. But I'll feel better about all this when my nephew gets
back from Iraq and gets to spend time with his wife and kids.

- Frank Krygowski

Date: 14 Nov 2006 01:19:26
From: Joe mcckim
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

Your nephew coming back and being 100% ok is not 100% chance!

<frkrygow@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1163173335.404606.303530@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>
> k Hickey wrote:
> >
> > Amen (see, I can agree with Frank). ;-)
>
> In the past two or three days, I've noticed lots of new "agreemenent."
> People now agree there were no WMDs! And GWB agreed that Rummy wasn't
> infallible! And suddenly, W's agreeing that we need cooperation
> between parties!
>
> Too bad this didn't happen a few trillion dollars ago. And too bad
> Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove hadn't merely been in charge of fender
> design, with GWB being the fender salesman. Mistakes there _are_
> infinitely easier to fix.
>
> Sorry, k. But I'll feel better about all this when my nephew gets
> back from Iraq and gets to spend time with his wife and kids.
>
> - Frank Krygowski
>

Date: 09 Nov 2006 10:07:06
From: peter
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

Date: 09 Nov 2006 09:01:51
From: landotter
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> landotter wrote:
> > frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > That front fender sure is short, though!
> > >
> > I've owned a in with the exact same fenders. Ain't nothing some milk
> > jug and a pop rivet or glue can't remedy.
>
> I agree. But why should the consumer have to do that?
>
> And isn't it weird that people are making fenders to (apparently) look
> sporty, at the expense of function? I mean, they're _fenders_!
>

It is what it is. I'm just glad than in has been putting out fairly
priced fendered utility bikes for at least a decade now. I had the San
Anselmo with Nexus and fenders, and it was a station wagon. The rigid
frames are a bit bone jarring, but when you're hauling 50# of Indian
groceries back from Devon Street, it's welcome.

On a related tangent of things not coming with what they should, I
bought a canister vacuum at Sears the other day which claimed "great
for hardwood". Well, the hardwood attachment had scratchy hard wheels,
some strange rubber flaps, and an ineffective brush. Plus, it was as
big as a phone book. Squeaky and scratchy. So I went to an old vacuum
repair place and got a vintage horsehair attachment for $15. It's
small, doesn't scratch and glides like magic. Best tool for the job,
but vacuum makers decided to suddenly complicate things. Much like the
fenders on the in that need a bit of help. Dumb, but easy to fix.
Best bet is to remove the pointless orginal flap and put on a new one.
Stair tread and pop rivets are the most macho way to go. At any rate,
it beats those bizarre 60-70s vestigal fenders the size of bananas.

Date: 09 Nov 2006 07:54:55
From:
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

landotter wrote:
> frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > That front fender sure is short, though!
> >
> I've owned a in with the exact same fenders. Ain't nothing some milk
> jug and a pop rivet or glue can't remedy.

I agree. But why should the consumer have to do that?

And isn't it weird that people are making fenders to (apparently) look
sporty, at the expense of function? I mean, they're _fenders_!

- Frank Krygowski

Date: 09 Nov 2006 18:33:12
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

Date: 08 Nov 2006 19:05:46
From: landotter
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> landotter wrote:
> >
> > The model I'd recommend as a "do-everything" bike is the in
> > Belvedere. Sora derailleurs, 8spd drivetrain with cheap consumables
> > when you wear stuff out, moderately skinny rubber, and best of all,
> > matching fenders. ...
> >
> > http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_belvedere.html
>
> That front fender sure is short, though!
>
> On my commuter, my mudflap (when installed) comes within about an inch
> of the ground. If it didn't, I'd still have a stream of water pumped
> into my shoes, and onto my chain.
>
> - Frank Krygowski

I've owned a in with the exact same fenders. Ain't nothing some milk
jug and a pop rivet or glue can't remedy. My new ride has the nice
Planet Bike fenders with the integrated flap. They look short, but I
barely get a little spray on my toes. Only real shortcoming of the
in fenders is that they dent easily being aluminum, on the other
hand they look sharp as they're powder coated to match the bike. The
grey looks far nicer than the black.

Date: 08 Nov 2006 18:57:54
From:
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

landotter wrote:
>
> The model I'd recommend as a "do-everything" bike is the in
> Belvedere. Sora derailleurs, 8spd drivetrain with cheap consumables
> when you wear stuff out, moderately skinny rubber, and best of all,
> matching fenders. ...
>
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_belvedere.html

That front fender sure is short, though!

On my commuter, my mudflap (when installed) comes within about an inch
of the ground. If it didn't, I'd still have a stream of water pumped
into my shoes, and onto my chain.

- Frank Krygowski

Date: 08 Nov 2006 15:24:19
From: landotter
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

catzz66 wrote:
> landotter wrote:
> >
> > I like in Bikes a lot, ridden thousands of miles on one of their
> > hybrids. Very well built at the factory.
> >
> > The model I'd recommend as a "do-everything" bike is the in
> > Belvedere. Sora derailleurs, 8spd drivetrain with cheap consumables
> > when you wear stuff out, moderately skinny rubber, and best of all,
> > matching fenders. Braze ons for racks and what not. $500 street price.
> > It looks very elegant and "urbane". Even the hubs are decent Formulas.
> > Cheap bike to own, and not too tempting to most thieves.
> >
> > http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_belvedere.html
> >
>
> Does this enter into it also?
>
> 36 hole rims on the Belvedere vs. the 20 front and 32 rear on the other
> bikes he was looking at.
>

Worth a mention, absolutely. Break a spoke and be able to ride home.
Replace it for a buck. No brainer.

> 700X35C tires on the Belvedere vs. 700X28C on the other bikes.

http://www.kendausa.com/bicycle/kwick.html

The Belvedere comes with 28mm Kenda Kwick Roller tires. At 410g they
should be durable, yet a bit nippier feeling off the line compared to
most 35mm tires. The fenders should accomodate up to a 37mm tire if you
want to go fatter, if memory serves me right. I almost bought one of
these in grey last year. Very handsome bike in person, and great price
point. If it had had a 3spd Nexus option, I would have taken it home.

Date: 08 Nov 2006 14:52:15
From: landotter
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

Ken Aston wrote:
> Thanks to everyone's help in my earlier thread at
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.misc/browse_thread/thread/03579fe6ffbae2fe/26b50605296a2a17#26b50605296a2a17
> I am now eager to put away my discount bike in the basement and buy a
> good quality bike.
>
> In particular I am looking into a in Lucas Valley
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_lucas_valley.html
> or a in Fairfax:
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_fairfax.html
>
> What do you think about these bikes for my purpose? I plan to ride it
> about 20 miles a day on regular roads in the city. Since I am wearing a
> suit once in a while, I would like to attach full length light-weight
> fenders and a simple chain guard, just one extra ring next to the
> pedals (is it possible?).
>
> The main purpose is riding in the city but next summer I want to do a
> month-long bicycle trip. Do you think I can attach front and rear racks
> and go on the road with the extra weight? I wonder if those thin tyres
> will be OK. If yes, it would be perfect, as a like to move on fast. Or
> should I get a seperate bike for the road trip?
>
> What do you think?
>
> Ken Aston

I like in Bikes a lot, ridden thousands of miles on one of their
hybrids. Very well built at the factory.

The model I'd recommend as a "do-everything" bike is the in
Belvedere. Sora derailleurs, 8spd drivetrain with cheap consumables
when you wear stuff out, moderately skinny rubber, and best of all,
matching fenders. Braze ons for racks and what not. $500 street price.
It looks very elegant and "urbane". Even the hubs are decent Formulas.
Cheap bike to own, and not too tempting to most thieves.

http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_belvedere.html

Date: 08 Nov 2006 17:03:51
From: catzz66
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than

landotter wrote:
>
> I like in Bikes a lot, ridden thousands of miles on one of their
> hybrids. Very well built at the factory.
>
> The model I'd recommend as a "do-everything" bike is the in
> Belvedere. Sora derailleurs, 8spd drivetrain with cheap consumables
> when you wear stuff out, moderately skinny rubber, and best of all,
> matching fenders. Braze ons for racks and what not. $500 street price.
> It looks very elegant and "urbane". Even the hubs are decent Formulas.
> Cheap bike to own, and not too tempting to most thieves.
>
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_belvedere.html
>

Does this enter into it also?

36 hole rims on the Belvedere vs. the 20 front and 32 rear on the other
bikes he was looking at.

700X35C tires on the Belvedere vs. 700X28C on the other bikes.

I'm still learning about this stuff, too.

Date: 08 Nov 2006 22:44:31
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

> Thanks to everyone's help in my earlier thread at
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.misc/browse_thread/thread/03579fe6ffbae2fe/26b50605296a2a17#26b50605296a2a17
> I am now eager to put away my discount bike in the basement and buy a
> good quality bike.
>
> In particular I am looking into a in Lucas Valley
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_lucas_valley.html
> or a in Fairfax:
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_fairfax.html

Perhaps more important than the particular bike is finding a good local
dealer who can make sure things fit properly (yes, even on a "hybrid" there
are lots of things that can be done to make it more comfortable &
efficient), assembled right, take care of any warranty issues and generally
make sure it stays on the road instead of in your garage. A really good shop
should also be able to relate to how you want to use the bike, and make
intelligent suggestions as to what bike might be best.

For what it's worth, you might be looking at two different bikes long-term.
A hybrid might be great for commuting, but perhaps not the best for
long-distance touring. I do see quite a few on the 100k rides, but those
folk are generally doing a bit more work, a bit more slowly, and a bit less
comfortably, than those with drop bars. There's a lot to be said for
multiple hand positions and moving more of the weight off your butt.

But getting back to the commute-style bikes, you might also find a Trek
7.5FX at a local dealer. They run just under $700 and ride quite nicely.
Don't be tempted by the 7.6 model though, unless it's generally flat where
you'll be riding... for some reason, they didn't spec that model with a
triple crank.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

"Ken Aston" <kenasto@googlemail.com > wrote in message
news:1162989722.316297.3550@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Thanks to everyone's help in my earlier thread at
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.misc/browse_thread/thread/03579fe6ffbae2fe/26b50605296a2a17#26b50605296a2a17
> I am now eager to put away my discount bike in the basement and buy a
> good quality bike.
>
> In particular I am looking into a in Lucas Valley
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_lucas_valley.html
> or a in Fairfax:
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_fairfax.html
>
> What do you think about these bikes for my purpose? I plan to ride it
> about 20 miles a day on regular roads in the city. Since I am wearing a
> suit once in a while, I would like to attach full length light-weight
> fenders and a simple chain guard, just one extra ring next to the
> pedals (is it possible?).
>
> The main purpose is riding in the city but next summer I want to do a
> month-long bicycle trip. Do you think I can attach front and rear racks
> and go on the road with the extra weight? I wonder if those thin tyres
> will be OK. If yes, it would be perfect, as a like to move on fast. Or
> should I get a seperate bike for the road trip?
>
> What do you think?
>
> Ken Aston
>

Date: 08 Nov 2006 14:47:20
From: DougC
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than

Ken Aston wrote:
> .....
> In particular I am looking into a in Lucas Valley
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_lucas_valley.html
> or a in Fairfax:
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_fairfax.html
>
> What do you think about these bikes for my purpose? ......
>
> What do you think?
>
> Ken Aston
>

I think you could spend a lot less for that kind of bike. Grab any $400
MTB or hybrid and put 1.3-inch wide tires on it if it doesn't come with
them. Full-suspension (and/or a springy seat post) will help preserve
your tires and make the ride a bit more comfortable.

----------
Just for fun--here's the 2007 Fusion (I have a 2006)
http://www.ransbikes.com/Fusion07.htm
The MSRP is $950 or so; I had a month-long wait for mine. I know the
Fusion frames can mount fenders and a rear rack (RANS sells them); I
dunno about the front racks. They have a site/forum just for these
models set up, where you could ask. http://www.crankforward.com/

These bikes are a lot more comfortable to ride--you won't need padded
gloves or shorts. You see people in the photos riding them wearing
/lycra/ shorts, but they are "recumbent" shorts, with no padding. Is
that different enough?

---------
For a bit over $1000, you can buy yourself a "lawn chair" like what I
got: http://www.cyclegenius.com/ltx.htm

The comfort difference between a recumbent and an upright bike is
tremendous; there's simply no comparison. There was once a time when I
would have tried it--but after having owned a couple recumbents, I can't
imagine riding cross-country on an upright bike for fun.
~

Date: 08 Nov 2006 12:01:11
From: catzz66
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than

I have absolutely no touring experience, but I'd wonder about the 28
spoke wheel and narrow tires. Hopefully someone who's experienced will
comment on this.

Date: 09 Nov 2006 03:00:28
From: Claire Petersky
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

"catzz66" <dingdong@rammalamma.net > wrote in message
news:4rekb8FqeuqpU1@mid.individual.net...
>I have absolutely no touring experience, but I'd wonder about the 28 spoke
>wheel and narrow tires. Hopefully someone who's experienced will comment
>on this.

I think I have 28 spoke wheels and 28c tires. These are just dandy for
commuting and light touring. If the OP is going to do a credit card tour,
this sort of spec is fine. I don't know if I'd want straight bars, though,
for a tour. It depends on how many miles a day the OP is looking at.

Another possibility for him, if he's looking at a touring bike, wants a more
mountain-bikey thing:
http://www.rei.com/online/store/ProductDisplay?storeId=8000&catalogId=40000008000&productId=47968753&parent_category_rn=4500921

--
Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
http://www.bicyclemeditations.org/
See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

Date: 08 Nov 2006 08:27:51
From:
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

Ken Aston wrote:
>
> In particular I am looking into a in Lucas Valley
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_lucas_valley.html
> or a in Fairfax:
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_fairfax.html
>
> What do you think about these bikes for my purpose? I plan to ride it
> about 20 miles a day on regular roads in the city. Since I am wearing a
> suit once in a while, I would like to attach full length light-weight
> fenders and a simple chain guard, just one extra ring next to the
> pedals (is it possible?).

Attaching fenders is an excellent idea. But on a quick inspection,
it's not clear to me how easy that will be. To easily attach fenders,
you need threaded mounting holes down by the axles. You also need a
hole near the top of the front fender- that is, at the top of the fork
under the headset. And in the rear, you need a mounting hole between
the two seat stays just above the rear tire, plus a mounting hole at
the very front-bottom of the rear fender, just behind the cranks. I
can't see if they've got those mounting points or not.

Plus, you need enough clearance between tires and frame so you can fit
a fender in there!

Without the mounting holes, fenders can sometimes be fitted. (Some
folks use nylon zip ties for this.) But it's much easier if the bike
is designed for them. Sadly, lots of bikes are made with uselessly
"close clearance" frames. Basically, to be sporty, they're precluding
fenders. It's more common with carbon fiber forks, so I'd carefully
check that out before I'd buy this bike.

The "extra ring" chainguards are not very common as afterket parts,
I think. Here's one, from one of r.b.tech's good guys:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/mguard.html (look just below the yellow box
of text.) But read the paragraph in the yellow box.

I don't ride in a suit, but I often ride in dress pants. I wax instead
of oil on my chain, to keep it clean, and I use a safety pin to keep
the cuffs from rubbing the chain. Others use similar solutions, but
the chainguard may help a bit.

Regarding those bikes, I prefer the Tiagra shifters on the Lucas
Valley, and I don't like the suspension seatpost on the cheaper
Fairfax. OTOH, I'm not a fan of carbon fiber bits - the fork on both
bikes, and the seat stays on the Lucas. I think you're paying for an
imaginary benefit, and getting some detriment (e.g. lack of fender
clearance).

Lots of people like those handlebars for city use. (I prefer drop
bars, but that's personal choice.)

>
> The main purpose is riding in the city but next summer I want to do a
> month-long bicycle trip. Do you think I can attach front and rear racks
> and go on the road with the extra weight? I wonder if those thin tyres
> will be OK. If yes, it would be perfect, as a like to move on fast. Or
> should I get a seperate bike for the road trip?

I think the 28mm tire width is the sweet spot for most commuters,
unless you've got dreadful roads. It's what I use, and I'm on the
potholed-filled freeze-thaw line in NE Ohio. 28s can also work for
loaded touring. I've done that, although I prefer 32s. You might
check clearance at the fork and chainstays to see if wider tires will
fit for that tour.

Will the bike take racks? Again, you need attachment points.
"P-clamps" can sometimes do the job, but separate rack attachement
points are nice. Many bike tourists (including me) really like front
"low-rider" racks. They carry panniers down at about front axle level,
and are the best place to put heavy items so they're carried by the
lightly loaded front wheel. But fashionable carbon forks almost never
have the mid-fork mounting hole to make mounting low riders easy. For
that, you probably need a dedicated touring bike.

OTOH, thousands of tourists travel without low rider front racks.
People tour on mountain bikes, recumbents, upright 3 speeds, etc. Some
pull trailers so their bike choice matters a lot less.

> What do you think?

My personal preference would be to look for a bike with a metal fork,
for what I see as better versatility. (You can also review the current
thread on r.b.tech about "trust carbon fork after wreck?") I'd also
give detail consideration to mounting some sort of good-sized bag
(handlebar bag? rack trunk? big saddlebag?) for carrying rain gear,
extra jacket, lunch, briefcase, whatever. I'd give detail
consideration to lights, too - lots of choices there.

I'm not pushing this brand, but: you might browse at Breezer Bikes,
for example,
http://www.breezerbikes.com/bike_details.cfm?bikeType=range&frame=range&bike=liberty
to see one company's offerings that pretty much match your ideas. If
you go with a different brand, you can use this as a reference for
mounting useful accessories.

Incidentally, for a person such as yourself who's asking intelligent,
but newbie questions, I'd say the choice of a bike shop is at _least_
as important as the choice of a bike.

Can you contact a bike club in the area and get a recommendation on a
shop that will help you - not just sell you the fashionable inventory
they're trying to drop at season's end?

Again, you're asking good questions, and your plans are excellent.
Good luck!

- Frank Krygowski

Date: 08 Nov 2006 08:04:11
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: How about this bike? (was: Why are expensive bikes better than cheap ones?)

Ken Aston wrote:
> Thanks to everyone's help in my earlier thread at
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.misc/browse_thread/thread/03579fe6ffbae2fe/26b50605296a2a17#26b50605296a2a17
> I am now eager to put away my discount bike in the basement and buy a
> good quality bike.
>
> In particular I am looking into a in Lucas Valley
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_lucas_valley.html
> or a in Fairfax:
> http://www.inbikes.com/bicycles_2007/html/bikes/bike_specs/specs_fairfax.html
>
> What do you think about these bikes for my purpose? I plan to ride it
> about 20 miles a day on regular roads in the city. Since I am wearing a
> suit once in a while, I would like to attach full length light-weight
> fenders and a simple chain guard, just one extra ring next to the
> pedals (is it possible?).
>
> The main purpose is riding in the city but next summer I want to do a
> month-long bicycle trip. Do you think I can attach front and rear racks
> and go on the road with the extra weight? I wonder if those thin tyres
> will be OK. If yes, it would be perfect, as a like to move on fast. Or
> should I get a seperate bike for the road trip?
>
> What do you think?
>
>

IMO, for riding in the city, those bikes seem a little pricey and the
carbon fiber parts, especially the carbon fiber seatstays on the Lucas
Valley, are kind of silly.

Here is a much less expensive alternative from IBEX, an internet direct
seller:

http://tinyurl.com/y3pft7

For your month long road trip next summer, you'll probably be happier
with a drop bar "touring" bike.