| |
Main
Date: 29 May 2007 12:26:54
From: Ignoramus4707
Subject: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
i
|
|
| |
Date: 06 Jun 2007 18:31:53
From: Nexus7
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On May 30, 10:19 pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org > wrote:
> OK, maybe in theory where all else is equal.
> In reality those 'swoop frame' open style designs are made with heavier
> tube and crash as well as anything; Certainly not fragile.
People are riding folders all over the continent and using them as
everyday bikes, and these are actually lighter frames. So the full-
size diamond frame, for most purposes, seems to be over-rated.
|
| | |
Date: 06 Jun 2007 22:59:42
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
> A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>> OK, maybe in theory where all else is equal.
>> In reality those 'swoop frame' open style designs are made with heavier
>> tube and crash as well as anything; Certainly not fragile.
Nexus7 wrote:
> People are riding folders all over the continent and using them as
> everyday bikes, and these are actually lighter frames. So the full-
> size diamond frame, for most purposes, seems to be over-rated.
I wouldn't say that. Where strength and weight are both critical a
diamond frame is probably the best solution. My point above is merely
that strength may be adequate with other designs where weight isn't
critical.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | |
Date: 06 Jun 2007 13:56:15
From: catzz66
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
Nexus7 wrote:
>
>
> People are riding folders all over the continent and using them as
> everyday bikes, and these are actually lighter frames. So the full-
> size diamond frame, for most purposes, seems to be over-rated.
>
>
People buy what they like and most buy the diamond frame. That's really
all it seems to boil down to. I do see some folders, but I have
personally never seen or ridden a bike with the nexus hardware. It
sounds interesting and I would try it if I had a chance.
In my area, most of the drop bar bikes being sold now are the breezer
type, which doesn't appeal to my wife at all. So when she upgrades, she
will probably go with some kind of hybrid bike with a compact frame.
|
| |
Date: 02 Jun 2007 14:51:10
From: landotter
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On Jun 2, 6:44 am, richard <rmccl...@insight.bb.com > wrote:
> Turdition. That design was to allow women to wear dresses while riding.
> A diamond frame is more rigid, stronger, lighter, and a wee less
> expensive to make. That's only the theory - you'll never notice those
> differences.
That's bunk. I grew up borrowing and riding women's bikes all the
time. I even have one as a utility bike. They're much more laterally
flexible, except the mixtes of course, and there are types of riding
that I'd rule out on one. Going to the store in flip flops to get a
six pack isn't one of them. :-P
|
| |
Date: 02 Jun 2007 06:44:01
From: richard
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
Turdition. That design was to allow women to wear dresses while riding.
A diamond frame is more rigid, stronger, lighter, and a wee less
expensive to make. That's only the theory - you'll never notice those
differences.
Ignoramus4707 wrote:
> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>
> i
|
| |
Date: 30 May 2007 22:04:54
From: landotter
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On May 30, 10:19 pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org > wrote:
> >> Ignoramus4707 wrote:
> >>> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> >>> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
> >>> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
> >>> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> >>> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
> > catzz66 <catz...@threeletterservice.com> wrote:
> >> Actual serious reply: Wouldn't you expect a standard frame be more
> >> rigid with the top bar attached higher up on the seatpost? I've never
> >> ridden a girl's bike. Do you have trouble getting your leg over a bike
> >> with a compact frame? I understand about the infant seat.
> flatline wrote:
> > It was my understanding that older-style women's bikes, where the top
> > tube was deeply curved and met the seatpost tube just a short distance
> > up from the bottom bracket, were considered dangerous (so the argument
> > went) because the frame could collapse like an accordion in front-end
> > accidents. Diamond-shaped men's bikes were supposed to be stronger.
>
> OK, maybe in theory where all else is equal.
> In reality those 'swoop frame' open style designs are made with heavier
> tube and crash as well as anything; Certainly not fragile.
I concur, slap my forehead and say "duh". Perhaps if Volvo made
wimmen's bikes, they'd accordion when in an accident to protect you,
but of course, they'd have a nice un-accordion button so you could be
back on your way quickly.
|
| |
Date: 30 May 2007 07:49:57
From: flatline
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
It was my understanding that older-style women's bikes, where the top
tube was deeply curved and met the seatpost tube just a short distance
up from the bottom bracket, were considered dangerous (so the argument
went) because the frame could collapse like an accordion in front-end
accidents. Diamond-shaped men's bikes were supposed to be stronger.
On May 30, 6:55 am, catzz66 <catz...@threeletterservice.com > wrote:
> Ignoramus4707 wrote:
> > There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> > one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
> > equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
> > question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> > men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>
> > i
>
> Actual serious reply: Wouldn't you expect a standard frame be more
> rigid with the top bar attached higher up on the seatpost? I've never
> ridden a girl's bike. Do you have trouble getting your leg over a bike
> with a compact frame? I understand about the infant seat.
|
| | |
Date: 30 May 2007 22:19:00
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
>> Ignoramus4707 wrote:
>>> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
>>> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
>>> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
>>> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
>>> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
> catzz66 <catz...@threeletterservice.com> wrote:
>> Actual serious reply: Wouldn't you expect a standard frame be more
>> rigid with the top bar attached higher up on the seatpost? I've never
>> ridden a girl's bike. Do you have trouble getting your leg over a bike
>> with a compact frame? I understand about the infant seat.
flatline wrote:
> It was my understanding that older-style women's bikes, where the top
> tube was deeply curved and met the seatpost tube just a short distance
> up from the bottom bracket, were considered dangerous (so the argument
> went) because the frame could collapse like an accordion in front-end
> accidents. Diamond-shaped men's bikes were supposed to be stronger.
OK, maybe in theory where all else is equal.
In reality those 'swoop frame' open style designs are made with heavier
tube and crash as well as anything; Certainly not fragile.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| |
Date: 30 May 2007 06:55:05
From: catzz66
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
Ignoramus4707 wrote:
> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>
> i
Actual serious reply: Wouldn't you expect a standard frame be more
rigid with the top bar attached higher up on the seatpost? I've never
ridden a girl's bike. Do you have trouble getting your leg over a bike
with a compact frame? I understand about the infant seat.
|
| |
Date: 29 May 2007 21:37:27
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
Ignoramus4707 wrote:
> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
At the margin, a diamond frame _can_ be marginally lighter/stiffer but
for the bulk of bicycle materials/designs it matters not.
Ride what you like, but ride.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| |
Date: 29 May 2007 16:43:08
From: russellseaton1@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On May 29, 12:26 pm, Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4...@NOSPAM.4707.invalid >
wrote:
> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>
> i
Compact frame bikes are mixte, womens frames. Since there appear to
be more compact frames on the market now days than horizontal top tube
frames, I would say bicycles are made like women's bikes today. Take
a men's horizontal top tube bike and lower the seat tube lug which
slopes the top tube downwards and you get a compact frame. Slope just
the top tube down and leave teh seat tube lug in the same place and
its a mixte, women's frame. End result is the same.
|
| |
Date: 29 May 2007 23:38:29
From: Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Hayfever Edition ®
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
"Ignoramus4707" <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid > wrote in message
news:B4udnRlwD-zD_8HbnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@giganews.com...
> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>
> i
Most of my bikes have straight top tubes, but my grocer is a women's fire
engine red Schwinn cruiser that I slapped together with spare parts and with
a basket up front.
|
| |
Date: 29 May 2007 11:41:27
From: landotter
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On May 29, 12:26 pm, Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4...@NOSPAM.4707.invalid >
wrote:
> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>
> i
They're usually much stiffer. Mixtes can be pretty stiff compared to
regular wimmen's bikes, I've had a nice mixte Frenchie bike that I
liked a lot. Stiff matters when you're whanging on the cranks hard, or
descending quickly.
That said, my flip-flop (shoe) bike is a candy apple red drop tube
Raleigh. It's great for what it's intended for, and people tend to
wave at me while I'm on it like I'm in parade. Take it over 25mph
downhill and it feels sketchy, so I don't do that.
Drop frame bikes are popular for both genders in most of Scandinavia,
Hollad, Germany and likely other places that use bikes for urban
transport. They still have men's bikes, but there's no social stigma
to riding a drop tube frame, that's a pretty uniquely American thing.
Ride yours and I'll ride mine. I'm so comfortable in my masculinity
that I ride mine often in wooden clogs while ringing its bell. Try it,
motorists will give you LOTS of room if you do. ;^)
|
| | |
Date: 01 Jun 2007 09:44:11
From: SMS
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
landotter wrote:
> Drop frame bikes are popular for both genders in most of Scandinavia,
> Hollad, Germany and likely other places that use bikes for urban
> transport. They still have men's bikes, but there's no social stigma
> to riding a drop tube frame, that's a pretty uniquely American thing.
I remember being in China and being informed that the "women's" bicycles
were a little more expensive, and much more desirable, just because they
were easier to get on an off of, and you did a lot of that in bicycle
traffic jams. They weren't just for dress wearers.
Of course I'll never forget my first trip to China, a bicycle tour,
where the local tour guide met us at the Jiangsu province border. A
beautiful young woman, riding a "man's" Flying Pigeon bicycle, with her
diaphanous purple dress hiked up over her knees, and her request of me
and another guy on the tour to "teach me bad words in English." Now
she's probably 40 and driving a minivan full of kids around.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Jun 2007 10:09:55
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com > wrote in message
news:46604ccf$0$27210$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> landotter wrote:
>
> > Drop frame bikes are popular for both genders in most of Scandinavia,
> > Hollad, Germany and likely other places that use bikes for urban
> > transport. They still have men's bikes, but there's no social stigma
> > to riding a drop tube frame, that's a pretty uniquely American thing.
>
> I remember being in China and being informed that the "women's" bicycles
> were a little more expensive, and much more desirable, just because they
> were easier to get on an off of, and you did a lot of that in bicycle
> traffic jams. They weren't just for dress wearers.
>
> Of course I'll never forget my first trip to China, a bicycle tour,
> where the local tour guide met us at the Jiangsu province border. A
> beautiful young woman, riding a "man's" Flying Pigeon bicycle, with her
> diaphanous purple dress hiked up over her knees, and her request of me
> and another guy on the tour to "teach me bad words in English." Now
> she's probably 40 and driving a minivan full of kids around.
I remember seeing pictures of military troops riding mixte and other drop
bar frames.
Chas.
|
| |
Date: 29 May 2007 11:14:28
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On May 29, 12:43 pm, bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On May 29, 10:26 am, Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4...@NOSPAM.4707.invalid>
> wrote:> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> > one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
> > equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
> > question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> > men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>
> Are you talking about a "mixte" style, i.e., where there is no top
> tube? Well, if you got the $$$, Rivendell has a "mixte" style bike for
> MEN and women. The MEN"s version is called the Wilbury; the women's
> version is the Glorius:
>
> http://www.rivbike.com/bikes/mixte
>
> I saw one once, the guy was riding around the parking lot of a coffee
> shop. Not sure how far he rides on it, never seen one on the road, but
> I'm sure its fine for tootin' around. Check it out!
Are you on salary with Rivendell, or are you paid per pro-Rivendell
troll?
|
| |
Date: 29 May 2007 20:00:42
From: Lou Holtman
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
Ignoramus4707 wrote:
> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>
> i
If women didn't wear skirts we all would ride 'men's bikes' I think. A
'men's' bike frame is .....eh..... stiffer. Do a full loaded tour on a
women's bike, you will notice. But for most of the time this isn't a
problem. So ride what you like. My grandpa kept riding his 'women's'
bike till he was 85 years old.
Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu (http://www.nb.nu)
|
| | |
Date: 29 May 2007 13:16:12
From: Ignoramus4707
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On Tue, 29 May 2007 20:00:42 +0200, Lou Holtman <lholremovethis@planet.nl > wrote:
> Ignoramus4707 wrote:
>> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
>> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
>> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
>> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
>> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>>
>> i
>
>
> If women didn't wear skirts we all would ride 'men's bikes' I think. A
> 'men's' bike frame is .....eh..... stiffer. Do a full loaded tour on a
> women's bike, you will notice. But for most of the time this isn't a
> problem. So ride what you like. My grandpa kept riding his 'women's'
> bike till he was 85 years old.
I see. I do not do full loaded tours, at most I have a 40 lb kid in
the back seat.
i
|
| |
Date: 29 May 2007 10:43:00
From: bfd
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On May 29, 10:26 am, Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4...@NOSPAM.4707.invalid >
wrote:
> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>
Are you talking about a "mixte" style, i.e., where there is no top
tube? Well, if you got the $$$, Rivendell has a "mixte" style bike for
MEN and women. The MEN"s version is called the Wilbury; the women's
version is the Glorius:
http://www.rivbike.com/bikes/mixte
I saw one once, the guy was riding around the parking lot of a coffee
shop. Not sure how far he rides on it, never seen one on the road, but
I'm sure its fine for tootin' around. Check it out!
|
| | |
Date: 29 May 2007 12:53:24
From: Ignoramus4707
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On 29 May 2007 10:43:00 -0700, bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On May 29, 10:26 am, Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4...@NOSPAM.4707.invalid>
> wrote:
>> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
>> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
>> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
>> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
>> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>>
> Are you talking about a "mixte" style, i.e., where there is no top
> tube?
Yes, in my bicycle, there is no top tube, there is a bottom tube and
two "higher" tubes that also go down.
> Well, if you got the $$$, Rivendell has a "mixte" style bike for
> MEN and women. The MEN"s version is called the Wilbury; the women's
> version is the Glorius:
>
> http://www.rivbike.com/bikes/mixte
>
> I saw one once, the guy was riding around the parking lot of a coffee
> shop. Not sure how far he rides on it, never seen one on the road, but
> I'm sure its fine for tootin' around. Check it out!
>
Looks similar, except mine has two "top" tubes that are downsloping.
i
|
| | | |
Date: 29 May 2007 12:01:23
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
"Ignoramus4707" <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid > wrote in message
news:24qdnfG5WdIJ9cHbnZ2dnUVZ_q7inZ2d@giganews.com...
> On 29 May 2007 10:43:00 -0700, bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On May 29, 10:26 am, Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4...@NOSPAM.4707.invalid>
> > wrote:
> >> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> >> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things
being
> >> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc.
My
> >> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> >> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
> >>
> > Are you talking about a "mixte" style, i.e., where there is no top
> > tube?
>
> Yes, in my bicycle, there is no top tube, there is a bottom tube and
> two "higher" tubes that also go down.
>
> > Well, if you got the $$$, Rivendell has a "mixte" style bike for
> > MEN and women. The MEN"s version is called the Wilbury; the women's
> > version is the Glorius:
> >
> > http://www.rivbike.com/bikes/mixte
> >
> > I saw one once, the guy was riding around the parking lot of a coffee
> > shop. Not sure how far he rides on it, never seen one on the road, but
> > I'm sure its fine for tootin' around. Check it out!
> >
>
> Looks similar, except mine has two "top" tubes that are downsloping.
>
> i
Mixte frames from most European (especially French) bike makers came with
a pair of parallel sloping tubes 12mm to 16mm in diameter (1/2" to 5/8")
instead of a top tube. On the continent, men as well as women rode/ride
mixte frame bikes, especially anyone who may have had problems swinging
their leg over the top tube.
Chas.
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 May 2007 14:04:49
From: Ignoramus4707
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On Tue, 29 May 2007 12:01:23 -0700, * * Chas <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com > wrote:
>
> "Ignoramus4707" <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid> wrote in message
> news:24qdnfG5WdIJ9cHbnZ2dnUVZ_q7inZ2d@giganews.com...
>> On 29 May 2007 10:43:00 -0700, bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > On May 29, 10:26 am, Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4...@NOSPAM.4707.invalid>
>> > wrote:
>> >> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
>> >> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things
> being
>> >> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc.
> My
>> >> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
>> >> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>> >>
>> > Are you talking about a "mixte" style, i.e., where there is no top
>> > tube?
>>
>> Yes, in my bicycle, there is no top tube, there is a bottom tube and
>> two "higher" tubes that also go down.
>>
>> > Well, if you got the $$$, Rivendell has a "mixte" style bike for
>> > MEN and women. The MEN"s version is called the Wilbury; the women's
>> > version is the Glorius:
>> >
>> > http://www.rivbike.com/bikes/mixte
>> >
>> > I saw one once, the guy was riding around the parking lot of a coffee
>> > shop. Not sure how far he rides on it, never seen one on the road, but
>> > I'm sure its fine for tootin' around. Check it out!
>> >
>>
>> Looks similar, except mine has two "top" tubes that are downsloping.
>>
>> i
>
> Mixte frames from most European (especially French) bike makers came with
> a pair of parallel sloping tubes 12mm to 16mm in diameter (1/2" to 5/8")
> instead of a top tube. On the continent, men as well as women rode/ride
> mixte frame bikes, especially anyone who may have had problems swinging
> their leg over the top tube.
>
I used to swing my leg behind the seat, however, there is a child seat
there now.
i
|
| | | | | |
Date: 31 May 2007 11:06:20
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On Tue, 29 May 2007 14:04:49 -0500, Ignoramus4707
<ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid > wrote:
>On Tue, 29 May 2007 12:01:23 -0700, * * Chas <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Ignoramus4707" <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:24qdnfG5WdIJ9cHbnZ2dnUVZ_q7inZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> On 29 May 2007 10:43:00 -0700, bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> > On May 29, 10:26 am, Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4...@NOSPAM.4707.invalid>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
>>> >> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things
>> being
>>> >> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc.
>> My
>>> >> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
>>> >> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>>> >>
>>> > Are you talking about a "mixte" style, i.e., where there is no top
>>> > tube?
>>>
>>> Yes, in my bicycle, there is no top tube, there is a bottom tube and
>>> two "higher" tubes that also go down.
>>>
>>> > Well, if you got the $$$, Rivendell has a "mixte" style bike for
>>> > MEN and women. The MEN"s version is called the Wilbury; the women's
>>> > version is the Glorius:
>>> >
>>> > http://www.rivbike.com/bikes/mixte
>>> >
>>> > I saw one once, the guy was riding around the parking lot of a coffee
>>> > shop. Not sure how far he rides on it, never seen one on the road, but
>>> > I'm sure its fine for tootin' around. Check it out!
>>> >
>>>
>>> Looks similar, except mine has two "top" tubes that are downsloping.
>>>
>>> i
>>
>> Mixte frames from most European (especially French) bike makers came with
>> a pair of parallel sloping tubes 12mm to 16mm in diameter (1/2" to 5/8")
>> instead of a top tube. On the continent, men as well as women rode/ride
>> mixte frame bikes, especially anyone who may have had problems swinging
>> their leg over the top tube.
>>
>
>I used to swing my leg behind the seat, however, there is a child seat
>there now.
On tandems and with child seats and stuff it's often easier to swing a leg up
and over the bars. The failure mode is worse, but it really is easier.
Ron
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 01 Jun 2007 14:36:11
From: meb
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
RonSonic Wrote:
> On Tue, 29 May 2007 14:04:49 -0500, Ignoramus4707
> <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 29 May 2007 12:01:23 -0700, * * Cha
> <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> "Ignoramus4707" <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid> wrote i
> message
> >> news:24qdnfG5WdIJ9cHbnZ2dnUVZ_q7inZ2d@giganews.com...
> >>> On 29 May 2007 10:43:00 -0700, bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> > On May 29, 10:26 am, Ignoramus470
> <ignoramus4...@NOSPAM.4707.invalid>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and
> heterosexual
> >>> >> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all othe
> things
> >> being
> >>> >> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and of
> etc.
> >> My
> >>> >> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women'
> bicycles, do
> >>> >> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
> >>> >>
> >>> > Are you talking about a "mixte" style, i.e., where there is n
> top
> >>> > tube?
> >>>
> >>> Yes, in my bicycle, there is no top tube, there is a bottom tub
> and
> >>> two "higher" tubes that also go down.
> >>>
> >>> > Well, if you got the $$$, Rivendell has a "mixte" style bike for
> >>> > MEN and women. The MEN"s version is called the Wilbury; th
> women's
> >>> > version is the Glorius:
> >>> >
> >>> > http://www.rivbike.com/bikes/mixte
> >>> >
> >>> > I saw one once, the guy was riding around the parking lot of
> coffee
> >>> > shop. Not sure how far he rides on it, never seen one on th
> road, but
> >>> > I'm sure its fine for tootin' around. Check it out!
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> Looks similar, except mine has two "top" tubes that ar
> downsloping.
> >>>
> >>> i
> >>
> >> Mixte frames from most European (especially French) bike makers cam
> with
> >> a pair of parallel sloping tubes 12mm to 16mm in diameter (1/2" t
> 5/8")
> >> instead of a top tube. On the continent, men as well as wome
> rode/ride
> >> mixte frame bikes, especially anyone who may have had problem
> swinging
> >> their leg over the top tube.
> >>
> >
> >I used to swing my leg behind the seat, however, there is a chil
> seat
> >there now.
>
> On tandems and with child seats and stuff it's often easier to swing
> leg up
> and over the bars. The failure mode is worse, but it really is easier.
>
> Ron
I often thought the mixte design gave enough space for preventing male
from becoming sopranos. :
--
meb
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Jun 2007 12:51:47
From: Bill
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
meb wrote:
> I often thought the mixte design gave enough space for preventing males
> from becoming sopranos. :D
>
>
That too. Hence my high mileage on a girls' Huffy. Cheap, 4,000+ miles,
and now worn out. I got my money's worth. I'm saving it for my sister's
visit later in June. She's 72 but still somewhat athletic.
Bill Baka
|
| | | | | |
Date: 30 May 2007 12:13:42
From: Doc O'Leary
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
In article <EsCdnUZCgKjM5MHbnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@giganews.com >,
Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid > wrote:
> I used to swing my leg behind the seat, however, there is a child seat
> there now.
The bike I purchased also has handle bars in front that I can swing my
leg over. I highly suggest you look into buying a bike with handlebars
so that you could do the same.
--
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, 4ax.com, buzzardnews.com, googlegroups.com,
heapnode.com, localhost, x-privat.org
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 30 May 2007 14:01:09
From: Phil, Non-Squid
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
Doc O'Leary wrote:
> In article <EsCdnUZCgKjM5MHbnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I used to swing my leg behind the seat, however, there is a child
>> seat there now.
>
> The bike I purchased also has handle bars in front that I can swing my
> leg over. I highly suggest you look into buying a bike with
> handlebars so that you could do the same.
Sounds painful, and acrobatic. Impressive.
--
Phil
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 30 May 2007 12:26:04
From: Dane Buson
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
Phil, Non-Squid <nice@try.to > wrote:
> Doc O'Leary wrote:
>> In article <EsCdnUZCgKjM5MHbnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>> Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> I used to swing my leg behind the seat, however, there is a child
>>> seat there now.
>>
>> The bike I purchased also has handle bars in front that I can swing my
>> leg over. I highly suggest you look into buying a bike with
>> handlebars so that you could do the same.
>
> Sounds painful, and acrobatic. Impressive.
It's not really that difficult. I used to do it all the time when I had
my daughter on the back of my Xtracycle. Of course, now I've added a
front seat (Bobike Mini), so I have to just stick my leg over the
crossbar in an awkward fashion.
--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
How can you govern a nation which has 246 kinds of cheese?
-- Charles de Gaulle
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 30 May 2007 12:16:11
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
"Phil, Non-Squid" <nice@try.to > wrote in message
news:465dbbe7$0$12429$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Doc O'Leary wrote:
> > In article <EsCdnUZCgKjM5MHbnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> I used to swing my leg behind the seat, however, there is a child
> >> seat there now.
> >
> > The bike I purchased also has handle bars in front that I can swing my
> > leg over. I highly suggest you look into buying a bike with
> > handlebars so that you could do the same.
>
> Sounds painful, and acrobatic. Impressive.
>
> --
> Phil
>
>
The nice feature about a Mixte frame is you don't have to swing your leg
over anything - you just step through the frame.
At one point mixtes were referred to as "step through" models so as not to
relegate them to one gender.
Chas.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Jun 2007 12:14:30
From: Matt O'Toole
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On Wed, 30 May 2007 12:16:11 -0700, * * Chas wrote:
> The nice feature about a Mixte frame is you don't have to swing your leg
> over anything - you just step through the frame.
Exactly. They're obviously good for women wearing skirts, but are also
handy for people carrying stuff on their bikes, carrying surfboards under
one arm, etc. Real surfers ride women's bikes!
Also, a lot of older people have trouble swinging a leg over the saddle,
because of lack of flexibility, arthritis, etc.; but once on the bike they
can ride just fine.
> At one point mixtes were referred to as "step through" models so as not
> to relegate them to one gender.
Definitely better nomenclature.
Matt O.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 May 2007 21:33:50
From: Sandy
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
Dans le message de news:7NydnYaZILmJUMDbnZ2dnUVZ_vShnZ2d@comcast.com,
* * Chas <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com > a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> "Phil, Non-Squid" <nice@try.to> wrote in message
> news:465dbbe7$0$12429$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>> Doc O'Leary wrote:
>>> In article <EsCdnUZCgKjM5MHbnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>> Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I used to swing my leg behind the seat, however, there is a child
>>>> seat there now.
>>>
>>> The bike I purchased also has handle bars in front that I can swing
>>> my leg over. I highly suggest you look into buying a bike with
>>> handlebars so that you could do the same.
>>
>> Sounds painful, and acrobatic. Impressive.
>>
>> --
>> Phil
>>
>>
>
> The nice feature about a Mixte frame is you don't have to swing your
> leg over anything - you just step through the frame.
>
> At one point mixtes were referred to as "step through" models so as
> not to relegate them to one gender.
>
> Chas.
"Mixte" is exactly not one gender.
|
| |
Date: 29 May 2007 19:41:11
From: Sandy
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
Dans le message de news:B4udnRlwD-zD_8HbnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@giganews.com,
Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid > a réfléchi, et puis a
déclaré :
> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>
> i
If the bikes you like make you want to ride more, and you've tried others
and not liked them, why change ? Wear out some tires !
--
Bonne route !
Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR
|
| | |
Date: 29 May 2007 12:43:03
From: Ignoramus4707
Subject: Re: "Men's" vs. "Women's" bicycles
|
On Tue, 29 May 2007 19:41:11 +0200, Sandy <leurre@frree.fr > wrote:
> Dans le message de news:B4udnRlwD-zD_8HbnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@giganews.com,
> Ignoramus4707 <ignoramus4707@NOSPAM.4707.invalid> a réfléchi, et puis a
> déclaré :
>> There is a question that bothers me. I am a man, and a heterosexual
>> one at that, but yet I prefer women's bicycles, all other things being
>> equal. They are easier to use for me. Easier to get on and off etc. My
>> question is, why are not all bicycles made like women's bicycles, do
>> men's bicycles offer any technical advantages or not.
>>
>> i
>
> If the bikes you like make you want to ride more, and you've tried others
> and not liked them, why change ? Wear out some tires !
I actually agree and have no plans to change my bicycle, despite
having gotten a 80's steel framed Peuegot for free recently. It is
just a question that I wanted to ask.
i
|
|
