This article is part of a series we are writing on getting started biking for transportation. Articles include:
- Taking the Plunge
- Picking a bike for everyday transportation
- Putting it all together: The accessories you need to successfully bike for transportation
- Locking Your Bike: Will your bike (and wheels for that matter) still be there when you return?
- Biking Safely in Traffic Video
- Tips for biking with kids
- Fixing a flat (coming soon)
- Basic maintenance of your bike (coming soon)
Which bike is the right bike?
Chances are you already have a perfectly good bike to begin biking for transportation sitting in your closet or garage. With a tune up and some accessories, you can be on your way. (Look for our upcoming article on accessories.)
In case you are shopping for a new bike or wonder whether the bike you have is a good bike for transportation, I’ve put together a summary of bicycle types and how they rate for commuting/running errands.
Light weight and performance features are not the focus. Instead, overall utility, ease of use, and appropriate features to the task at hand are emphasized.
European City Bike (also know as a Dutch Bike or English Roadster)
Rating: Excellent
With counties like the Netherlands and Denmark having 1/3rd of their population using bikes daily, the Europeans have developed a bike design that is perfect for everyday transportation. These are also quite stylish bikes. These bikes have fenders and chain guards so you can wear pants or a skirt without worrying about getting your cloths dirty. Features also include a heavy duty steel frame, a rack (or racks) to carry things, a dynamo hub to power lights without batteries, and internal gearing and brakes for near maintenance-free operation. Build in wheel locks and bike pumps are usually standard. The geometry of your position is very upright, comfortable, and dignified. The down side is that these are usually heavy bikes, and the entry level bikes are 1 or 3 speed (hey, Holland is flat. . . what do they care!) For use in our decidedly hillier terrain, opt for at least a 5 speed model, preferably 7 or 8 speed. If speed and performance is what you are looking for, skip these. But, if you want a bike that is comfortable, has the ability to carry a lot, and to take a lot of abuse and keep on going, these are your bikes. Great bikes by Azor, Velorbis, Batavus, and Pashley are made for the European market, so they can be hard to get. Recently, Electra began making their Amsterdam line based on these bikes. If you do get an Electra, be sure to have your dealer install a front brake if your are getting a model with only coaster brakes. (You need more than your feet as a secondary brake system!)
Touring Bikes
Rating: Good to Excellent
Touring bikes are both durable and versatile in application. These bikes are usually steel (sometimes aluminum) road bikes with tire clearance and eyelets for fenders and racks. Sometimes they have disk brakes. While they are usually heavier than performance road bikes, they are much lighter than European city bikes and most entry level hybrids. The road bar allows for multiple hand positions, so if you are riding farther, this is a real advantage. The down side to these bikes is they usually do not have chain guards and their brake and shifting systems are external so they aren’t as maintenance free, and you’ll have to wear ankle straps with pants. They also put you in a more aggressive position on the bike than most city bikes and hybrids. Surly makes a great low cost touring bike called the Long Haul Trucker and Rivendell is also a frame maker that sells great touring bikes.
Cyclocross Bikes
Rating: Good to Excellent
I have to say I’m very partial to these bikes. They are do anything, go anywhere bikes, and they’re fast. If you are looking for a bike that you can commute on every day and still go out and race or do club rides on the weekends, this is your bike. Cyclocross is a sport where you ride courses with a mix of road and off road with sections where you dismount and run with your bike over obstacles. These are bikes made to take a beating and are usually very easy to set up with fenders and a rack. Just be sure to stick with entry or mid level bikes. These are going to be made of steel or aluminum and will have eyelets for racks and fenders. The high end bikes are going to be made of carbon fiber and will be sans eyelets and water bottle mounts (“No water?”, you say. Ask the Belgians; it’s a cyclocross thing.) You are also going to want to swap the treaded tires you get with slick road tires. Like the touring bikes, these bikes will not have a chain guard, and their brake and shifting systems are external so you will need to plan accordingly. Also, these are racing bikes, so the position will be more aggressive than the touring models. Most bicycle manufactures make at least one cyclocross model. Bianchi makes a good entry level cyclocross bike called the Volpe and Redline has a full series of ‘cross bikes.
Folding Bikes
Rating: Fair to Good
If space is an issue, you should consider a folding bike. In small wheel and regular wheel models, these bikes allow you to get where you are going and take your bike with you inside with relative ease. Most folders have 16 or 20 inch wheels making them fold up quite small. Depending on the model you get, your folder may have internal gearing and fenders and a rank installed.
I commuted for about 9 months on a folder, and one of the nice features was the ability to throw the bike in the trunk of most cars if getting a ride from a friend. The down side to the folders are twitchier wheels on the small wheeled versions, more flexy frames, arougher ride (due to the small wheels), and difficulty finding the smaller tires in road slick versions locally. Dahon makes a full line of entry level folders, British Brompton and Birdy bikes are the most elegant in design, and Bike Friday can make custom folders for you in addition to the regular line.
Road bikes
Rating: Poor to Fair
Road bikes are bikes designed to be ridden long distances and in competition. They can be the lightest bikes available and can carry some of the highest performing equipment. Though a great road bike is hard to rival for ride quality, most do not make good bikes for general transportation. Most do not have tire clearance and frame eyelets for fenders and racks. Also, the geometry is going to be more aggressive on these bikes like the cyclocross bikes and their will be no chain guard in sight. The higher end models are made of carbon fiber and sell for the price of a used car. Not the kind of bike you want to chain up and leave for hours on end. Stick to entry level or older used road bikes if you want to go this route.
Hybrids
Rating: Poor to Fair
Hybrids are essentially mountain bike frames with more comfort oriented parts, usually slick tires, and a less aggressive position than mountain bikes. Every large bike manufacturer makes these which makes them easy to get and lower in cost than most bikes. However, I think hybrids are a design compromise that makes a bike that is neither good for transportation or competition. They are geared more towards tootling around on the weekend or going to the coffee shop. There’s not anything wrong with that, but if you want a bike to transportation, you can do much better. Another disadvantage is that their price advantage compared to the end product isn’t that great once you add all the accessories you’ll need to make it a good bike for transportation.The frames and fork designs can make it difficult to fit all the accessories you need. If you already have a hybrid, you can make it a decent city bike with the right accessories, but avoid this design if you are buying new. (Check back for our upcoming article on accessories for help on this.)
Mountain Bikes
Rating: Poor to Fair
I’d say these are worse than hyrbids, but at least mountain bikes are good at something: going off road. Unfortunately, they are not very good at riding on road. The suspension systems and knobby tires on mountain bikes make riding them for descent distances extremely inefficient. They are ubiquitous though and chances are if you own a bike, you own a mountain bike. If you already have one and don’t want to get a transportation specific bike, do yourself a favor and swap the tires for slicks and dial your suspension to the least amount of travel. If you have a full suspension bike (i.e, suspension built into the frame), I’d save it for the trail and get another bike.
Fixed Gear a.k.a. Fixies or Track Bikes
Rating: Poor to Fair
Fixed gear bikes are track bikes that have been adapted for street use initially made popular by bike messengers. These bikes have no free wheel which means there is no coasting. If you don’t have a brake (NOT ADVISED!!!), the strength of your legs pressing backwards are what stop you. I have to admit, I’m cutting against current fashion by saying I’m not a fan of these bikes outside of a velodrome. However, go to the downtown of any large city these days and you’ll find all sort of hipsters riding fixies so they are due a review. Fixed gear bikes have some things going for them: low cost, simplicity of design (no shifting), and improvements in your bike handling skills. However, models are getting more expensive and I don’t find a single gear very charming when I’m trying to haul groceries uphill. If you go with a fixie, be sure to get at least a front brake installed. You’ll also need to add fenders and a rack. You can also convert an old road bike to a fixed gear or single speed with conversion kits available at your local bike store. There are lots of makers of fixed gear bikes, but I’d recommend Mission Bicycles for beautiful custom and semi-custom fixies. By the way, did I mention to be sure to have a break installed before you ride?
Triathlon/Time Trial bikes
Rating: Poor
Out of all the bike designs, these should be avoided. Tri bikes are build for one thing: aerodynamic speed. Most models these days are built from carbon fiber (i.e. they’re expensive) and have an aerobar/pursuit bar set up that puts you in an extremely aggressive position. Riding in the areobars mean your hands are not near the brakes: not good for city traffic. Think of taking a Lamborgini to pick up a bed. It can be done, but I wouldn’t recommend it. I love tri bikes, but skip them for everyday use.
Related posts:
- Why this roadie really likes the new SRAM mountain group ...
- A Series of Tubes: Final buildup on Marcus Rando Light Touring Bike ...
- Custom builders take a stab (and mostly miss) on transportation bikes at Oregon Manifest ...
- Product Review: Yuba Mundo 21 Speed ...
- Review: Versa 8 Speed Road Shifter for Shimano Internal Hub ...
on Aug 17th, 2008 at 12:20 am
This is the best article on what bike to buy that I have seen in a decade. Elliot – you are a fine writer and I will be reading all your articles from now on.
I beg to differ on the folding bike. My Dahon rides better than anything else in the garage and is far from twitchy. It also fits under my desk without any problems. I can sit on it when the train is too packed. I can put my feet up on the top-tube. Big wheels are not needed on smooth tarmac and it is a pleasure to ride with no bike in your field of view, as if on a magic carpet. People are always amazed at the folding trick and a folder is always a talking point. The rack and mudguards come as standard, please mod up to ‘Fantastic to Excellent’.
on Aug 17th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Thanks, Edward. I’m going to stick with my rating on the folders. As I mentioned, I commuted for 9 months on a Dahon (the speed pro), and I really wanted to like the bike more than I did. This may have more to do with my riding style, which is pretty fast and aggressive (my wife calls it assertive.) Folders can be fine bikes so I don’t want to discourage people from using them. I just want people to know tradeoffs. If given the choice where space or the need to board a train wasn’t an issue, I’d stick with a non-folder with larger wheels.
on Aug 20th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Another great article, and I agree with the European city bikes being at the top of the list.
I ride a Rans Vrex recumbent for commuting, and I would have to rate it as “Good”.
On the plus side, it’s very comfortable, relatively fast, gives me a heads-up, eye-level view of cars and carries plenty with two racks.
The negatives are same as many recreation-focused bikes sold here: there’s the possibility of chain grease on my clothing and it’s not designed to left in the rain. In particular, the seat is essentially a big sponge and needs to be covered or removed before much rain falls.
on Aug 23rd, 2008 at 6:10 pm
How about a 90’s steel road bike with wider tires (say 700 x 28)
IMO it’s a good compromise (cheap, fast, comfortable)
on Sep 2nd, 2008 at 1:08 pm
My only criticism here is the hard line between categories. The bike makers have been busy mincing the categories between road and mountain bike, and the ideal commuter platform for a city with terrain seems to me a “hybrid” that leans more to the road side, but with an IG hub and fenders/rack, and a lower weight.
The Civia Hyland sells for about the same price as many of the available Dutch roadsters listed. My choice was the Specialized Globe Comp – too bad it’s being discontinued. I also don’t get the bias against aluminum frames, especially for everyday in-the-weather duty.
on Sep 2nd, 2008 at 5:32 pm
2wheeldeal,
I’ll stand by my dislike of hybrids as I still think the vast majority of them are mountain bike inspired, which I believe is not the best platform for biking for transportation.
As for frame materials, each material has it’s strength and weaknesses, but in biking for transportation, I think steel’s only down side is rust. This can be prevented with a good coating of rust preventer on the inside of the frame. Otherwise, steel is strong, durable, and provides warnings when beginning to fail. Aluminum on the other hand weakens with age and can fail without warning. This limitation is OK if you are racing and getting a new bike every year or so but is not the best material for a long term transportation bike.
on Sep 6th, 2008 at 7:25 am
Elliott,
Forgive me, I’m doing marathon comments on your site, which I have obviously just discovered.
I like what you have done here as far as categorizing bikes and pinpointing their pros and cons vis-a-vis commuting. However, I would argue, as some other commenters have, that your personal ratings may not reflect the experience that other riders have with a particular type of bike. Each rider is different (age, body type, skill level etc), and each rides in different conditions. A bike that you would not consider may be an ideal solution for someone else.
As a long time bicycle retailers, I have learned to keep my mouth shut when asked to rate bikes. I turn the question around, and ask the customer questions, and draw out of them the answer about what type of bike would be most appropriate.
I find that each person’s individual enjoyment of the bike (recumbent, folding, hybrid, touring) is directly proportional to how comfortable they are handling that particular bike.
on Sep 6th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Thanks for the comments, Justyna.
What I am trying to do with this article is list in my opinion the best bicycles for transportation, not recreation. This is the focus of our site. Most of the bikes sold in American are geared toward recreation, whether it be hard core roadies or cruising down to the coffee shop or the trail on a Saturday morning. There is nothing wrong with that per se but they do not make good transportation bikes. You have to add lots of accessories to make them work and I think they are a compromise at best.
I want people who are interested in biking for transportation to find bikes that can grow with their needs and be durable. Those were the criteria of my article and why I rated bike styles the way I did. If I were writing about the best century ride bike or trail bike, my rating would have been very different.
No matter which bike someone chooses, I hope this article helps them think about what are features they should be looking for in a good transportation bike so they don’t have regrets down the road. I also hope by encouraging consumers to demand these features in bikes, the bike industry will build more practical bikes for the market, not just race inspired steeds with fenders.
on Sep 6th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
I certainly understand your desire to get manufacturers to come up with transportation-friendly features. We have been hammering on them to do that for fifteen years.
We, too, focus on people who wish to use bikes for transportation. However, in my experience, people have successfully used a wide variety of bikes for that purpose. My husband, and a number of our regular, die-hard commuter customers use recumbents; I use a late-80’s mountain bike modified slowly beyond recognition; several car-free customers of ours use Bike Fridays; by far the most popular choice among our customers is some variety of a hybrid bike, with cycle-cross and touring bikes not far behind.
Do these bikes require modification to make them worthy commuters? Perhaps. Some people like to keep their bikes just the way they came of the showroom floor; others get a thrill out of customizing theirs for specific needs.
To me, it’s about each individual rider. I cannot in clear conscience tell a customer that a European-type urban bike, or a low-racer trike isn’t appropriate just because I don’t chose to ride one myself. Heck, I can’t tell a guy who rides his Roadmaster 15 miles each day that it’s the wrong choice, or that he is not a commuter.
Please forgive me. This is your site, and I also cannot in good conscience critique your approach. It’s just that, as someoe who sells bikes and biking for a living, I have found that the more we tell people what they should ride, the less likely they are to ride at all.
on Sep 7th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
I have an Electra Townie bike, which is similar in style to the European bikes, and I’d also categorize it as possibly excellent.
on Sep 7th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Punditus Maximus,
I think Electra is one of the few American bike companies actually thinking about how regular people are going to use the bikes in their design. They have had a few quality control issues, and they seem to be allergic to putting a secondary brake on their coaster brake bikes (which I think is incredibly dangerous if you live anywhere with hills.) However, all in all I think they are on the right track.
on Sep 7th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
That backup brake issue is huge, it’s one of the reasons I got rid of my Electra Amsterdam (see the earlier review here on the blog).
on Sep 9th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
I’m also fond of the Giant Suedes, but I don’t know how reliable they are.
on Sep 9th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
Solid article. However, I do disagree with part of Elliott’s reply to 2Wheeldeal. I do not believe that an aluminum frame will fail without warning. I think there is often plenty of warning, it’s just that people don’t know what to look for, or people are putting stresses on the frame that are beyond design capabilities (e.g. jumping high obstacles or going way off-road on a touring bike). I have ridden the same Cannondale aluminum touring frame for approximately 15 years now. I have toured with it and I bicycle commute year round (24 miles round trip from my home in Minneapolis to my work in a nearby suburb) and have yet to have a problem. I know that the frame won’t last forever, but it is not going to suddenly explode like some kind of dangerous metal origami while I’m on the road. A fatigued frame will show cracks, usually radiating from the weld beads and usually on the down and post tubes. Regardless, before I get on my ride, I always check the whole frame for cracks and the weld beads for any signs of stress. It’s just part of my check list every time I get on my bike: I unlock my bike, I pack my panniers, I check brakes, quick releases, chain, spokes, tubes and welds beads. I think everyone, regardless of the material of their bike, should have a similar check list, especially if they’re riding a bicycle with an unknown history. All that said, I’m hoping I find some signs of fatigue soon so I can justify purchasing the Surly Long Haul Trucker!
on Sep 10th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
You might suggest that your ratings are based on your needs and preferences
I’m curious, WHy cyclocross over hybrid? I, for one, would definitely need to accessorize either… and I, too, have found my Dahon a delight because those little tyres bound across the potholes, and it *squirts* through intersections.
on Sep 10th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Responding to Mpls2Wlr:I’ve had aluminum snap without warning, but I think this gets to the nature of the material. Steel bends under stress, aluminum breaks. Also, I would say just because you’ve had an aluminum bike that has lasted 15 years does not mean that will be the case for everyone. I think you can have a perfectly acceptable aluminum transportation bike. You are just going to need to be more careful with load capacity and more vigilant about cracks as the frame ages. I think this makes steel a better choice (certainly not the only choice.) Plus if steel breaks, it can be repair. Not so with aluminum.
Responding to siouxgeonz: I think you are right that most cyclocross bikes will need additional accessories, however I stand by rating it above hybrids. Most cyclocross bikes are going to have better components, ride more efficiently, and be more fun to ride longer distances than a hybrid.
on Sep 12th, 2008 at 2:04 am
Nice article. I am in agreement with you about the fixies, but as some have mentioned, the best bike is one you want to ride, or will ride. In my personal experience, I find getting all those little pieces together before I go out (like lock, bag, light, etc.) tiresome, and I like to minimize this so as to make an outing as easy as jumping in the car. To this end, having the lights, rack, bags/basket, lock, fenders, chainguard on the bike is worth it. Its hard trying to keep it light though. I do find it amazing the number of times you can ride even when the streets are wet – the actual amount of time its really raining is pretty small.
on Sep 19th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Nice article, but I think lugging one of those European city bikes on and off the TRE train going into Fort Worth would get old fast, and my 14 mile commute would seem a LOT longer – like forever. For a long commute, heavy bikes just don’t work and touring/cyclocross do. The point is it all depends on your daily riding needs. One question – in North Texas it tends toward lightning when it rains – doesn’t that happen in Austin, making fenders less relevant?
on Sep 19th, 2008 at 9:12 pm
Steve, I would say that most storms in Austin form VERY quickly and usually turn into miniature flash floods, probably 80% of them or so. Depending on the season, they may only last an hour, but it’s still pretty bad to get caught in one.
I think the fenders mostly help for after the rain, not during, at least in Austin.
on Nov 11th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
It’s your blog, of course, but I think some of the reasoning supporting your ratings are awfully conclusory, particularly when extrapolated to users around the country. One that sticks out in my mind is that ‘classic’ Dutch city bikes at 40-50 pounds are ‘perfect’ bicycle designs. Naturally, NOTHING is perfect, just ask the guy in average shape trying to pedal a 40-lb. bike up steep hills (8-speed hub or not).
Same with mountain bikes – “the suspension systems and knobby tires on mountain bikes make riding them for decent distances extremely inefficient” – actually, even Dutch and German city bikes are now going with suspension forks (great for hopping city curbs and maintaining one’s balance on cobbled streets), and MB commuters can easily exchange their wheels/tires for 1.5″ slicks and a rack (much more easily than a Dutch city bike user can drop 20 pounds off his porky, inefficient frame). The Brits found this out 20 years when they dumped their heavy roadsters formerly used for daily transport in favor of the MTB.
on Nov 11th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
John W.
Just because a bike is slow don’t mean its not a good match for the job. The focus of utility bikes is on utility, not speed. Now, should we ride a heavier bike when an equally useful lighter bike is available? Of course not. But mountain bikes and Dutch bikes are apples and oranges. Standard mountain bikes are no where near as well equipped to carry heavy loads nor run maintenance free when left in the elements like a Dutch bike is. The mountain bike became popular as a recreational bike, not a utility bike. Dutch bikes and English roadster are currently enjoying a renaissance just because they are so well suited for biking for transportation. This article addresses transportation uses, not recreational uses, thus the reasoning behind each rating.
on Nov 12th, 2008 at 9:57 am
“Dutch bikes and English roadster are currently enjoying a renaissance just because they are so well suited for biking for transportation.”
Actually, I think the reason these bikes are being discussed at all is because they’re very, very trendy – just like the mountain bike in 1982. Heavy utility bikes are the ‘party line’ bike – slow, inoffensive (except to motorists, who are enraged by slow cyclists more than anything else, it seems), and thoroughly proletarian. Besides, the Dutch still use them, and since they are the most bike-friendly nation in the world, they MUST be the right choice, yes?
One of the more prolific bicycle authors was a man named Rob Van der Plas, a bicycle engineer and stolid Hollander who moved from that country to the sunny climes of California. He continued to write about bicycles, even founding a bicycle publishing company. He did not take his heavy European city bike with him. Writing in a seminal work on bicycle commuting, he stated that heavy utility bikes were “less practical for everyday use” (in the U.S.). Instead, he recommended a hybrid, mountain bike, or sport bike. What changed? His cycling environment, that’s what.
It’s very hard to make a case for the traditional 40lb. city bike for anything but nearly flat terrain or a lack of lighter alternatives, hence their popularity in Holland and a few other mostly flat or impoverished areas of the world. Their weight and cumbersome size means they are going to be left outside in public areas, not taken indoors as one could with a mountain bike. In many areas of the USA, leaving a bike outdoors means that it will be stolen or vandalized. Until that happens to them, people will experiment, I’m sure of that.
on Nov 12th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
The weight issue is very overrated. I live in a fairly hilly city, and I do not find Dutch bikes to be a problem. Now, if you can show me a lighter bike that has all the utility and durability of a Dutch bike for transportation cycling, I’ll gladly put it on there. I think mountain bikes fall way short on this. (Again we are talking about the purpose of the bike. I love road bikes for long weekend rides, however they are not the best choice for transportation cycling. If I want to ride a trail, the mountain bike is the best bike for the job.)
As for their popularity, I attribute it to a change in the way Americans are using bikes. This is a trend, not trendy. In the past 60 years, bikes have been viewed as toys, not valid transportation options, thus the popularity of road and mountain bikes. Now however people are dumping car use for its negative economic and environmental impact. If you are using a bike for transportation, you will gravitate to a bike designed for that purpose as opposed to a performance bike repurposed for utility cycling.
on Nov 12th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Let me say first, that if we are talking short distances with no steep hills, and no need to coexist with faster traffic, I can see using an ECB. I used to have one in France, which I sold to get a (very nice) randonneur for longer distance commuting. Like Mr. Van der Plas, I part company with the heavy utility cycle when it comes to hills or longer-distance commuting (Van der Plas chose a heavy-duty Trek touring bicycle for commuting in California).
I would also heartily agree with you that today’s ultralight, specialized road racing bike, or a dual-suspension mountain bike, are not suitable for use as utility cycles.
This however misses the point. By focusing only on those examples, one leaves out on a wide variety of perfectly suitable sport, mountain, touring, or hybrid bikes that surpass the ECB for daily transportation over a wide variety of distances and terrain.
Take the ‘hybrid’ photo above. To me, it actually looks like a photo of an inexpensive Schwinn child’s mountain bike or ‘trials’ bike. I would agree that bicycle, as depicted with its heavy disc brake and steep geometry is a mighty poor choice for an adult to use as a utility bicycle for daily transportation. But modern hybrids now come in many new variations that are ideal for many daily transportation uses. There is the hybrid city bike, the cross bike (a 700c-tired ‘cross’ between a touring and a mountain bike), and the commuter hybrid. The cross and commuter bikes use frames derived from road and touring bicycles, and 700c tires, but they are NOT road racing bicycles, nor are they cyclocross designs. Instead they have more relaxed frame geometry, combined with some load-carrying ability.
Then there is the hybrid city bike. You might consider this an ECB, but it’s actually derived from the mountain bike. It has a very strong, light frame, great load-carrying ability, 26″ tires, and is by far the toughest and most durable of these three. Many come with racks and lights (some even have chainguards), all ready to go.
Another choice for daily utility use is the plain or hardtail mountain bike, or its variant, the ‘Expedition Touring Bike’. These have more relaxed geometry and frame attachments for heavy-duty racks, fenders and lights, and can be fitted with other accessories. It just isn’t true that a 25-pound steel mountain bike is incapable of carrying extremely heavy loads. In fact, strength and load-carrying is why they are the preferred basis for long-distance touring across remote areas of the world. This is why many British cyclists, having purchased mountain bikes originally just for sport, later began to use them for daily utility use in place of the old roadster designs. Built for mud, wet, and off-road abuse, they did just fine when used for daily transportation, even when left outdoors. As anyone who has seen our mobile homeless on bicycles can attest, the standard unsuspended or hardtail mountain bike can withstand a lot of abuse without much maintenance.
Of course, with any bicycle, there is always SOME maintenance. On an ECB, chains, sprockets, and tires will also wear out, bottom brackets will also need to be replaced (or rebuilt), spokes will also break, and rims will also bend. The hub gearing is frequently cited as the main advantage of an ECB when it comes to maintenance or durability, but even these go out, and when they do, it usually has to be replaced, and it isn’t cheap. On the other hand, I recently restored a $58 1984 touring bike for $40 in parts, including a used Suntour derailleur and a new chain.
on Nov 12th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Wow, you really care about this. Perhaps you should start a blog.
on Nov 19th, 2008 at 10:15 am
I ride a 7-speed beach cruiser to work, and find it excellent for the task…or it will be once I add fenders.
The low-slung bottom bracket means I can set my saddle height relative to the BB for best pedaling efficiency, yet still get a foot firmly on the ground at stops, not just the very tip of my toe.
The upright position is better for visibility, both from my own viewpoint as well as from other traffic’s, and is definitely more comfortable.
I replaced the super-fat treaded tires with some narrower ‘city slicks’ with water channels for less rolling resistance and swapped the backswept handlebars for some hi-rise (not apehangers) bars that give me more room in the ‘cockpit’ and allow me to sit upright with a comfortable arm & hand position.
Seven gears allow me to haul my big ol’ body and a 45-lb. bike up any hills I’ve encountered so far (mostly on Metric, Parmer, Braker).
It ain’t very fast…but it’s fast enough, and very comfortable and stable.
on Jan 13th, 2009 at 11:55 pm
I love my Dutch bike for commuting in Chicago! Yes, it’s slow relative to some other bikes, but with stop lights and other city obstacles, I arrive at my location just as quickly as others (who obey traffic rules).
on Feb 5th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
What do you think of the Kona Ute? Did a test ride, just around the block in down town Palo Alto, CA., seems solid, smooth, and comfortable. Is it worth the price, $900.00?
on Feb 5th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
I’ve not ridden the Ute, but I do have an Xtracycle and generally think long tails are a good idea. There are some limitations of the Ute though. It is not rated to haul people like the Xtracycle is and doesn’t have the accessory choices of the Xtracycle. Having said that, as a general cargo bike, I think it’s a good choice and $900 is certainly less than you’d pay for a new bike converted with an Xtracycle Free Radical kit.
on Feb 5th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
What about the Yuba Mundo cargo bike?
Price starting at $800.00, would it be a better choice?
on Feb 7th, 2009 at 6:45 am
I’ve not ridden the Yuba either, but the last time I looked the Ute had a better quality component spec. This is more important in a cargo bike than a general utility bike. You are potentially going to be hauling as much as a couple hundred extra pounds so you’re going to want brakes that are decent and a transmission that isn’t going to be skipping gears on you under load.
I’d also say the Ute looks cooler, and that cannot be discounted when shopping for a bike.
on Feb 24th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
Disagree with the rating on mountain bikes to a certain extent. I have converted on old hardtail mountain bike, a 1988 Diamondback Ascent EX. New seat, handlebars, and slicks. Added a rack, fenders and lights and it makes a great commuter bike. I switch to winter tires and keep riding in all but the worst conditions. Riding a small bike adds a little more confidence in icy conditions, for my commute it has worked out great.
on Jun 19th, 2009 at 12:17 am
I ride a fixed gear as a commuter bike.
I am faster than everyone on the street, including them triathalon training types.
I keep my stuff in a bag, on my back. I carry a lot of stuff.
on Jun 19th, 2009 at 7:29 am
Jeff,
Just because a bike is fast, doesn’t make it a good transportation bike. I have often in the past ridden a very fast road bike with a messenger bag. Did it get the job done? Yes. Would I have been more comfortable and able to carry more stuff on a Dutch bike or touring bike? Yes. Your fixie may be fun to ride but I would not recommend it to the general population wanting a good bike designed to get them and their stuff from point A to B.
on Aug 4th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
prob going to get a right ribbing here but here goes . . . im 48 and still love BMX bikes after having them as a lad and for the last 5 years . . and i have a specialized fuse 5 really dont want to give it up . . it fits in my vw camper great and is used for canal paths, parks, beaches, camp sites etc also trying to keep up with a GF on a mountain bike . . . Ive been looking into the possability of fitting gears (im getting old lol) but not a fan of deralliers (spelling) looking above you have listed folders with 20″ wheels . with hub gears
hmmmm which if any could i have fitted to my 36 sp rhyno lite wheel? (110mm between rear drop outs) will i have to have the rear widend? would it make a difference? how many gears? . . ive scanned and scanned to find info for anyone doing this before 
maybe im the only one mad / stupid enough to try 
if anyone can advise me (nothing rude ta) would really appreciate a mail
buddah.mickey@hotmail.co.uk .. Tony
on Aug 4th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Tony,
Like some of the other bikes suggested in this thread of comments, your BMX may be fun, but it is not a practical bike for the everyday transportation needs of most people.
As for the conversion to gearing, you might look at this recent Bike Hugger article about converting a Bmxish bike to three speed Sturmey Archer internal hub.
on Dec 30th, 2009 at 2:32 am
Just a nosy question-what make and model is the pictured touring bike?
on Dec 30th, 2009 at 11:19 am
mjh,
It’s a custom touring bike from Vanilla Cycles out of Portland, OR.