Went to local shop today (they only had two steel frame bikes) . Looking at ordering the Marin Muirwoods 17" 2008 as they only had a 20.5" in stock. 
Nearest 17" Muirwoods to ride is like 100 miles away!
Interesting for 2008 Marin have an urban bike called Hamilton with 29" wheels and single speed.
What's the 29" wheel all about ?
http://www.leisurewheels.co.uk/products.php?plid=m1b0s20p3619&z=3501
Nearest 17" Muirwoods to ride is like 100 miles away!Interesting for 2008 Marin have an urban bike called Hamilton with 29" wheels and single speed.
What's the 29" wheel all about ?
http://www.leisurewheels.co.uk/products.php?plid=m1b0s20p3619&z=3501
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
wheel sizes..
a 29" wheel is equivalent to a 736 wheel in size, hence about 5% larger in diameter VS a 700c type.Everything else being equal, the larger wheel/tire system will have lower rolling resistance than a smaller one. That means theoretically you should be able to start from a standing stop with less effort. Not sure if studies have been done to this effect, but that's the theory anyway. Also the ease of "rolling over" obsticles is reduced.
The Marin looks like an interesting bike given that it is a steel one, and double butted, but un-named, so probably a little heavier than some of the "boutique" steels.
a 29" wheel is equivalent to a 736 wheel in size, hence about 5% larger in diameter VS a 700c type.Everything else being equal, the larger wheel/tire system will have lower rolling resistance than a smaller one. That means theoretically you should be able to start from a standing stop with less effort. Not sure if studies have been done to this effect, but that's the theory anyway. Also the ease of "rolling over" obsticles is reduced.
The Marin looks like an interesting bike given that it is a steel one, and double butted, but un-named, so probably a little heavier than some of the "boutique" steels.
Re: wheel sizes..
Nanook, let's not confuse the isssue. A 29" wheel is simply a 700c rim with a mountain bike width tire on it.
"700c" is a very old French designation harking back to the days of single speed bikes without rim brakes. There were at one time 3 widths of 700 tire available A, B and C, all with an outer diameter of 700mm. The rims for each of these tires got progressivly smaller to maintain the overall diameter of the wheel.
The strange thing is that 700c survived as the standard for racing bicycle rims, when it was origanally outfitted with the widest tire.
A better designation is that used by the European Tire and Rim Technical Orginization (ETRTO), where the nominal width (actual width changes with rim width) and exact bead seat diameter of a tire is given in mm. A 700x23c racing tire will have moulded somewhere on its sidewall 23-622. A 29" tire will say something like 50-622.
Oh, and about the rolling resistance, you are correct. However, for a standing start there is the not so small matter of inertia. Here is where a smaller wheel has the advantage.
Nanook said:
Nanook, let's not confuse the isssue. A 29" wheel is simply a 700c rim with a mountain bike width tire on it.
"700c" is a very old French designation harking back to the days of single speed bikes without rim brakes. There were at one time 3 widths of 700 tire available A, B and C, all with an outer diameter of 700mm. The rims for each of these tires got progressivly smaller to maintain the overall diameter of the wheel.
The strange thing is that 700c survived as the standard for racing bicycle rims, when it was origanally outfitted with the widest tire.
A better designation is that used by the European Tire and Rim Technical Orginization (ETRTO), where the nominal width (actual width changes with rim width) and exact bead seat diameter of a tire is given in mm. A 700x23c racing tire will have moulded somewhere on its sidewall 23-622. A 29" tire will say something like 50-622.
Oh, and about the rolling resistance, you are correct. However, for a standing start there is the not so small matter of inertia. Here is where a smaller wheel has the advantage.
A bit of an essay from a man who used to ride in Central London
A couple of the chaps I work with cycle the distance you're proposing. One rides a cheapish derailleur geared bike and expects to replace parts frequently. The other rides a slightly more expensive derailleur geared bike and maintains it beautifully.
I used to commute to work and had a geared bike and a single speed bike. Provided the terrain is fairly flat, a single speed wins hands down.
Problems of a derailleur geared bike:
The chain, block, sprockets and rings need to be cleaned after each wet ride otherwise the grit will wear them all out in short order and waste power.
The rear wheel isn't as strong because of the dish.
It's heavier. That block, extra length of chain, mechanisms, levers, etc.
Problems of a single speed bike:
Hills.
Advantages of the derailleur geared bike.
Goes up hills more easily. Definitely a bonus on a longer ride, but fifteen miles is on the cusp.
Easier to buy.
Advantages of the single speed bike:
If you have gears, you're wondering all the time about whether you're in the right one. That's extra work on top of keeping an eye on rush hour traffic. The relief of simply pedalling harder or softer to vary speed instead of fiddling with gears removes a lot of mental strain.
The rear wheel has virtually no dish, so it's rigid. The frame is more rigid. There isn't any sogginess in the chain as you take up the slack. Single speed bikes are very responsive, and that's important when somebody does something unexpected.
Mucky chains don't waste as much power. Muck still wears everything but the rear sprocket is more robust and the perfect chain line reduces wear.
You didn't say how tall and heavy you are? If you have longer legs than average (33" for me) you benefit from longer cranks. Are you riding through town or country? If there's a lot of stopping and starting, a single speed bike wins.
My bikes are Reynolds 653 steel frames of identical geometry. One is a track frame (narrower stays, different dropouts, no braze-ons), the other a road frame (braze-ons etc). The single speed is 53/16 and has 27" tyres 1" wide. 34/17 is far too low for a fifteen mile ride. The geared bike is 53/39 on the front, then close ratio 12-20 on the back, with 700c 18mm slick tyres.
ash_dac said:
A couple of the chaps I work with cycle the distance you're proposing. One rides a cheapish derailleur geared bike and expects to replace parts frequently. The other rides a slightly more expensive derailleur geared bike and maintains it beautifully.
I used to commute to work and had a geared bike and a single speed bike. Provided the terrain is fairly flat, a single speed wins hands down.
Problems of a derailleur geared bike:
The chain, block, sprockets and rings need to be cleaned after each wet ride otherwise the grit will wear them all out in short order and waste power.
The rear wheel isn't as strong because of the dish.
It's heavier. That block, extra length of chain, mechanisms, levers, etc.
Problems of a single speed bike:
Hills.
Advantages of the derailleur geared bike.
Goes up hills more easily. Definitely a bonus on a longer ride, but fifteen miles is on the cusp.
Easier to buy.
Advantages of the single speed bike:
If you have gears, you're wondering all the time about whether you're in the right one. That's extra work on top of keeping an eye on rush hour traffic. The relief of simply pedalling harder or softer to vary speed instead of fiddling with gears removes a lot of mental strain.
The rear wheel has virtually no dish, so it's rigid. The frame is more rigid. There isn't any sogginess in the chain as you take up the slack. Single speed bikes are very responsive, and that's important when somebody does something unexpected.
Mucky chains don't waste as much power. Muck still wears everything but the rear sprocket is more robust and the perfect chain line reduces wear.
You didn't say how tall and heavy you are? If you have longer legs than average (33" for me) you benefit from longer cranks. Are you riding through town or country? If there's a lot of stopping and starting, a single speed bike wins.
My bikes are Reynolds 653 steel frames of identical geometry. One is a track frame (narrower stays, different dropouts, no braze-ons), the other a road frame (braze-ons etc). The single speed is 53/16 and has 27" tyres 1" wide. 34/17 is far too low for a fifteen mile ride. The geared bike is 53/39 on the front, then close ratio 12-20 on the back, with 700c 18mm slick tyres.
Re: Re: wheel sizes..
Moment of Inertia clip of the day (MOICOTD):
MOICOTD
I'm usually more concerned with not getting run off the road. The all time classic maneuver in this town is when a car will pass you at high speed, then make a hard right turn directly in your path. This is especially interesting on a group ride with everyone traveling at 35kph.
Jeff
maxro said:
Moment of Inertia clip of the day (MOICOTD):
MOICOTD
I'm usually more concerned with not getting run off the road. The all time classic maneuver in this town is when a car will pass you at high speed, then make a hard right turn directly in your path. This is especially interesting on a group ride with everyone traveling at 35kph.
Jeff
tire /wheel sizing...
well I agree with you, maxro... after re-reading some 700c stuff in a text on the shelf. I suspect that's where many fall down and where confussion starts )I'vce never suggested that I'm infalible). I think your xx-622 suggestions make completely more sense than the 700C or any of the French system. It would be nice if all tire/wheel manufacturers could agree to adopt a common international standard that everybody uses...but our neighbours down south seem to resist anything "metric" just because it is metric in units of measurement.
Regarding commuter bikes, EC8010 actually has practical knowledge of the local conditions and ash_dac would be well advised to take his suggestions and comments to heart.
Many years ago Mountian Bike Action magazine hds an issue on "mudbikes", and although all the editors bitched about dry weatherperformance of the internal gear/brake hub assembly, they all loved it in the rain and the mud.
well I agree with you, maxro... after re-reading some 700c stuff in a text on the shelf. I suspect that's where many fall down and where confussion starts )I'vce never suggested that I'm infalible). I think your xx-622 suggestions make completely more sense than the 700C or any of the French system. It would be nice if all tire/wheel manufacturers could agree to adopt a common international standard that everybody uses...but our neighbours down south seem to resist anything "metric" just because it is metric in units of measurement.
Regarding commuter bikes, EC8010 actually has practical knowledge of the local conditions and ash_dac would be well advised to take his suggestions and comments to heart.
Many years ago Mountian Bike Action magazine hds an issue on "mudbikes", and although all the editors bitched about dry weatherperformance of the internal gear/brake hub assembly, they all loved it in the rain and the mud.
OK, at 5' 8" you are pretty well ideally matched to "normal" 170mm cranks. You can have a nice small frame that will inherently be very rigid but light. Your legs are probably suited to a lower ratio than mine (tall people work best will tall gears), so 48/16 is probably more suitable, perhaps even 46/16. If you're riding through winter, you want 23mm tyres on strong rims. Ensure that you can get mudguards in, but you really don't need much room and the closer they are to the tyre the more effective they are; cycle manufacturers usually leave far too much room.
http://www.konaworld.com/bikes/2k7/SMOKE/index.html
Kona Smoke single speed conversion.
Could it be done with a kit ? (It has formula hubs which I can't find info on)
http://www.sunsetmtb.co.uk/shop/index.php?product_id=380
Kona Smoke single speed conversion.
Could it be done with a kit ? (It has formula hubs which I can't find info on)
http://www.sunsetmtb.co.uk/shop/index.php?product_id=380
EC8010 said:
http://www.evanscycles.com/product.jsp?style=13466
Do you mean it would be converted to fixed gear ?
Is that legal ?
35 pounds seems a bit steep too
How hard is it to change a tyre on a track rear end frame ?
£35 sounds very steep to me too. Fixed wheel is legal and you're not required to have a brake on that wheel. It takes a lot of getting used to and you can damage your knees on over-run. Imagine you've just sprinted to overtake something, you then want to slow down but your legs are now being driven by the pedals. That can really hurt. The other danger is going round a corner and catching a pedal on the ground. Against that, fixed wheel teaches you to ride with a smooth cadence and they go up hills better than freewheels (or maybe they teach you to ride better). Traditional racers used to train on fixed wheels in the winter. I tried fixed wheel for a time but decided it was too dangerous.
Track ends are slightly more difficult for repairing punctures, but not for the reason you'd think. You loosen the wheel nuts, slide the wheel forward to slacken the chain and allow it to be unhooked from the sprocket, then slide it back and the mudguard often gets in the way, necessitating undoing the two mudguard stay screws. If you don't have mudguards on at the time (I take mine off when we have a summer), it's easier to get the wheel out than on a geared bike. Replacing the wheel, you need to set the chain tension, so that it runs freely without tightening but only just. I like my single speed bike...
Track ends are slightly more difficult for repairing punctures, but not for the reason you'd think. You loosen the wheel nuts, slide the wheel forward to slacken the chain and allow it to be unhooked from the sprocket, then slide it back and the mudguard often gets in the way, necessitating undoing the two mudguard stay screws. If you don't have mudguards on at the time (I take mine off when we have a summer), it's easier to get the wheel out than on a geared bike. Replacing the wheel, you need to set the chain tension, so that it runs freely without tightening but only just. I like my single speed bike...
formula hubs n' such
Formula hub reviews
cheap! But they perform like it.
The Kona Humuhumu-Nukunuku-Apua'a might be a better choice , it's already a single speed..with a Shimano coaster brake/hub.
The kit linked to replaces the deraileur and the cog set on the rear freehub. Just store your deraileur and cogset (and lockring) in a dry place (or spray it with motorcycle chain wax) to keep moisure off and out of it.
In fact you could obtain the same effect by picking your front chainring size and limit the front derailuer to the middle chainring (using the deraileur adjusting screws), and adjust the rear deraileur similarly to limit it to a single rear cog.
I think the benefit of the Smoke with a chain tensioner /spacer/cog set up (even an old deraileur /single speed spacer/ single cog) would be the relative ease of converting back to a multispeed if needed or wanted for weekend fun rides into offroad situations.
Being Canuck, I like Konas (never owned one, but been around enough of them to really respect what they are. The company reps I've met from Kona are "real" bike guys).
Formula hub reviews
cheap! But they perform like it.
The Kona Humuhumu-Nukunuku-Apua'a might be a better choice , it's already a single speed..with a Shimano coaster brake/hub.
The kit linked to replaces the deraileur and the cog set on the rear freehub. Just store your deraileur and cogset (and lockring) in a dry place (or spray it with motorcycle chain wax) to keep moisure off and out of it.
In fact you could obtain the same effect by picking your front chainring size and limit the front derailuer to the middle chainring (using the deraileur adjusting screws), and adjust the rear deraileur similarly to limit it to a single rear cog.
I think the benefit of the Smoke with a chain tensioner /spacer/cog set up (even an old deraileur /single speed spacer/ single cog) would be the relative ease of converting back to a multispeed if needed or wanted for weekend fun rides into offroad situations.
Being Canuck, I like Konas (never owned one, but been around enough of them to really respect what they are. The company reps I've met from Kona are "real" bike guys).
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.