 |
| Girl on fixedgear/track bike. Photo: Joel Lingat |
I ran today, its one of my goals for 2012 to run much more. Ultimately I would like running to be as natural a choice of mode of transportation as cycling is today. Also I am on a bike, a spinning bike or real bike about twenty hours a week, some variation in my exercise regime is probably advisable.
And running is very much like cycling, you use your calves and hamstrings more when running, and the thigh somewhat less, you head is in a constant position, you only want to use power to move yourself forward, not up and down, not from side to side, just forward and away, it really has much of the same beauty of motion. I believe running and cycling to be very complementary to exercising your legs. Which is actually all besides the point.
 |
| Photo: Gary Harrison |
 |
| Fixed gear bike play - Photo: Laila Ghambari |
I do enjoy to run on the treadmill during the winter,. At one of the gyms I attend, the treadmills I use, face the parking lot and street. Everybody who visits the gym, passes by. two girls came on men’s road-bikes, which is not uncommon for girls between maybe 17 and 30 years old, and for good reason. Why, why, why, would a girl choose the inferior design of the woman bike, with the missing top-tube, which brings so much stability to the frame. No matter what material and no matter how thick the frame is, the women’s design never brings that feel good stiffness of a great men’s steel frame (…and yes I only ride steel).
You may argue, that the womens design is much more feminine, simply as it is the women’s frame. Which I may tend to agree with
Still you got to respect the girls who makes the conscious preference and choice of a man´s frame. Even more so, when choosing a track hub, over a soft granny-bike, in lousy quality.
Maybe its not as much if the women’s design is better or worse, more or less feminine as the clear message of the active conscious deliberations and final choice I like ;-)
19 thinking out louds:
Obviously, you've never ridden in a skirt! :D
But seriously, now that I use a bike for commuting to and from campus, wearing a skirt isn't really a possibility on my mens frame. And sometimes, I like to wear a skirt.
I'll be inheriting my mother's women's frame bike soon and I'll test ride it and compare with my men's frame with your comments in mind (they are both 1970 Schwinn Varsities, a matching set they bought when they got married, so the comparison should be good!)
"You may argue, that the womens design is much more feminine, simply as it is the women’s frame."
But I won't. I will argue that without being told it's a "women's" frame you wouldn't know it was feminine. You might even conclude it was a masculine anatomic safety feature, as one might argue that skirts are not feminine and that pants for men are a western absurdity.
Of course the latter isn't really true. Pants were introduced to the west largely by the Mongol cavalry and it took them several hundred years to catch on. Pants were considered a certain mark of the barbarian throughout the range of the Roman empire and well beyond.
Of course there were also those barbarian Germanic tribes, but as the Danes are my host here . . .
"Obviously, you've never ridden in a skirt!"
I have, and I favor the ankle length and styles of the Buddhist countries. It can be done on a diamond frame, although one might question with what degree of grace in the mounting.
Mikael, this "Lars Barfred" is some sort of joke, yes? I'm not sure I find it as amusing as you do.
Many people who can't or don't want to lift their leg over the top tube of a man's frame choose a loop frame bike. If you have any hip issues at all, a men's bike is a pain. It's not just so we can "look pretty".
There's enough discussion on women cyclists' Internet forums on "women's " bike design.
I guess some do think about the step through design for skirts.
But more importantly (at least in North America), the focus for alot of women is finding a bike that fits them and working with bike shop employees who treat them respectfully as customers and not recommend a wrongly sized bike for them.
The skirt issue is not discussed much in the groups I frequent ...because a better fitting bike will encourage the woman (or any bike owner) to continue cycling more regularily and farther.
And some of these women do cycle in skirts....and own several bikes.
Well it should be obvious that women aren't immune to the er, siren call of hipster fashion!
But do people really still care about the "men's" vs. "women's" frame issue as some sort of gender issue?!
It seems that for 99% of bike riders, the most practical approach is that of Japan (a "practical cycling" country if there ever was one): there's almost no physical difference between the bikes men and women ride, and the market has basically settled on the "women's" frame (or some intermediate design, with a very low/slanting top-bar) as the universal solution. So basically everybody—including the most stodgy and conservative men—rides on "women's" frames...
Despite riding diamond frame road bikes including fixed gear, for sport, my preference to ride step-through bikes for transportation remains strong. I am simply not comfortable mounting and dismounting a diamond frame bike in a skirt. I am also not comfortable riding in the city on a road bike with aggressive posture. Others' experiences may differ, but the classic step-through works for me.
"No matter what material and no matter how thick the frame is, the women’s design never brings that feel good stiffness of a great men’s steel frame (…and yes I only ride steel)."
Oh dear: early signs of an approaching mid-life crisis?
Yes, the reason for bikes not being universally step-through is that a diamond frame is indeed slightly more rigid, with the result that at each push on the pedals a little less energy is wasted in altering the frame geometry. On hefty steel-frame utility bikes this flexing is marginal, but with lightweight racing frames it would be major issue. Does anyone remember the notorious Swedish Itera bicycle made of plastic? When one of those was toiling up a hill you could actually see the frame bending to and fro.
As snogglethorpe points out, in Japan most bikes are step-through: they just seem to prefer them that way. In fact even the famous WW2 Japanese military bicycle - the one which they used to such effect in Malaya - had a "female" frame.
The big advantage of a diamond frame, I find, is that it's much easier to port the bike on your shoulder over stiles and up and down the stairs at railway stations.
"at each push on the pedals a little less energy is wasted in altering the frame geometry."
Actually, no, that's not the problem. The problem is that the frame geometry alters by twisting the head tube out of plane, then springing back, doing nasty things to the handling.
Hence the the classic mixte design running two small diameter tubes straight to the rear dropout to stabilize it, one resisting twist in tension and the other in compression, at the expense of making it more of a step over than a step through.
@kfg:
Thanks for that explanation. When we lived in Holland, though, I would often use my wife's bike, which was exactly the same as mine except for having a step-through frame, and I can't say that I ever noticed much difference. Where it was definitely better, however, was on shopping trips (we didn;t have a car) where it was a lot easier to mount with heavy baskets front and rear. Try that with a diamond frame and you're liable to go crashing over the other side.
I must admit that I prefer the step through design because of the comfort it provides and screw stiffness issues. Being able to hop off easily makes up for it.
@BG, This blog was not intended as an important comment on todays society, if you find it offending, please let me know, I am sorry you did not find i just a little entertaining ;-)
Everybody else, well I have never worn a skirt, so no, but I find few women do nowadays, to those who do I encourage you to do so as often as possible, its beautiful, not least on a bike.
But consider owning more than one bike, I could never do with one bike, I have five, all serving different purposes. I would really love to add a cool mountain bike, a Bulitt cargobike, and a time trial as well, why settle for one ;-)
@ Vocus Dwabe: "I can't say that I ever noticed much difference."
You'll notice that most mixtes are rather sporty bikes. That's because at less than sporty loads the torque on the down tube(s) is low enough that in practice it doesn't exist.
Like the FIAT 850 Spider, the market for these was always dominated by the urban 20 somethings.
"it was a lot easier to mount with heavy baskets front and rear. Try that with a diamond frame and you're liable to go crashing over the other side."
That is why, although I defended the ability to ride a diamond frame in even an ankle length skirt, what I have parked out in the yard is a swan's neck.
Even though I can only kinda vaguely recall being 20 something I can still ride pretty sporty and even have a few bits of lycra in the drawer (graphics free monochrome), but I ain't a damned fool about it.
@Lars: "I would really love to add a . . . time trial as well"
If you like spinning and would love a time trial bike, how about giving small gear (60" max, I'm afraid I'll leave you to do the conversion) a try?
As issues of power production and aerodynamics are minimal and it all comes down to pedaling skill you can build a dedicated bike for next to nothing with scrounged bits.
Half an hour for the 16 km is achievable.
It's also a gentleman's sport. Standard dress for competition, even at the national level, is traditionally a long sleeve white button down shirt (tie optional, but a touch of class), a black jacket and plus two trousers.
Hello world. Coming from America, male. I have ridden a step through in winter for the sole reason it is easier when falling down to step through thus the name. In last year I have also designed a handlebar set up that has some feminine lines. The Detroit Handlebar is very user friendly for any age and sex. The patent pending design allows for multiple component placement, hand positions and facilitates torso and limb adjustments. Any design that gives riders ultimate flexibility and comfort is a step forward for bike riding. See the DIY page on my blog. click
OK, just out of curiosity, assuming you are able to obtain one, how do you propose to enforce a patent on flop 'n chop?
For that matter, why do you think you would need to?
Lars, this is more than a flop and chop. The 45 degree bend is the patentable design. The DIY modification which you can refer to on my home page is for prototype purposes. Let me say this. In American cities there is no typical bike ride to work or school but the distance traveled could safely be 10-20 kilometers each way. The Detroit Bar allows for multiple hand positions for these longer rides. It also facilitates torso and limb adjustments while traversing varied terrain. For instance my commute to work is at least 20k each way, up and down hills and over uneven streets while riding in traffic, a separated bike trail, darkness, icy conditions, etc. So as the conditions change so does my body and that is the value of this design. Now take a static hand position and your body stays static. And that's OK if the ride is 1-2 kilometers on flat ground. The other alternative is a drop handlebar. Issues with a drop bar is the hunch over position which is less desirable for commuting safely in urban areas. So to wrap up. I would appreciate you not to dismiss something so quickly on first sight. A little bit of information can go along way.
A) I am not Lars.
B) I am an American
C) I "commute" by bicycle in the mountainous northeast up to 25 miles each way, with one off transportational rides much longer.
D) Drop bars only force a hunched over position if you install them that way.
E) There are a number of riser bar styles that have been developed and refined over the past century quite suitable for long distance touring as well as much shorter commutes.
And last, but certainly not least:
F) As I offered no critique of your bars whatsoever I could not have dismissed them and your response was, well, unresponsive.
I actually had to give up running due to knee problems, but I as I cycled more the knee problem went away...
In all fairness, I think the lady who wrote this feature does miles on the bike, if you want to get from A to B on a bike than the lack of vertical strength of a ladies spec bike contributes to a weaker, less efficient bike. If you are trying to go fast or be accurate the statements here are bang on. However if you are riding 2/3 miles to camus, than you don't care about these features.
If the bike is for fitness or fun, the low frames are useless.
Screw the designers who tell women they should be wearing a skirt and mount gracefully. Girls can do it just as well as boys.
Post a Comment