# Why must everyone have a Mountain Bike??



## Sheffield_Tiger (16 Mar 2011)

A mate of mine has been told to get some extra exercise, specifically cucling, by the doc to combat hypertension. Now, he doesn't drive so he'll not be loading the bike and taking it off-road - and I know him too well, he doesn't like going somewhere just for the enjoyment of the journey - on holidays he'd rather watch DVDs or find a pub then go for a walk "just to go and come back again - what's the point?" - so I know for a fact he won't get as far as cycling out to the peak district to use an off-road bike. It's not that he's lazy, he does have active hobbies such as airsoft, he just can't see the enjoyment in the journey.

He's asked me to help him choose a bike, and has come back with an example of the bikes he likes

Now, I appreciate drop handlebars aren't everyone's cup of tea so not everyone wants a road bike, and there's an image thing...but he likes black, urban styles, he'd make a great ninja, so I'm trying to direct him to the fakenger style, with a bike to suit (although not SS!!!)

I can see myself having difficulty persuading him that an MTB is not the best option - though thankfully the models he likes both happen to be hardtails with lock-out forks so that's one thing

Now, in the 80s and early 90s, MTBs did a lot for cycling IMO, making cycling "cool" again unlike the grange-hill-bike-shed falcon 5-speeds (though i was never cool, I always had the 5-speeds.

There are so many more options out there....why do some people have to have a "mountain bike or nothing" - which inevitably ends up rusting away or given away?


----------



## mightyquin (17 Mar 2011)

How did people cycle up and down mountains before mountain bikes came along? I've found a book on bikes from 1979 and the term 'mountain bike' doesn't appear anywhere, nor are there any obvious equivalents! 

I think most uninformed people see chunky tyres and suspension and just assume that's going to be better than a rigid frame and skinny wheels!


----------



## marzjennings (17 Mar 2011)

If the objective is for your friend to get fit through cycling, then a heavy mtb with chunky tyres will do him far better than a light weight roadie frame with slicks.

If I had to choose one bike to keep, it would be a mountain bike.


----------



## Mad Doug Biker (17 Mar 2011)

I have a cheap BSO* which I use to go to the shops, etc, when the weather is crap and which I can abuse a bit. I'll ride it until it falls apart! (although preferably not as I am riding it) 
I do have to agree with you though, there is more to life than mountain bikes (my other bike is a FELT S22 TT bike ).



* -A Universal Mantis Y shaped BSO thingy which I got for £30. If anyone was desperate to steal it, I am sure I'd find it abandonned about 100 yards down the road .


----------



## lukesdad (17 Mar 2011)

Because they re - easy tiger.


----------



## DTD (17 Mar 2011)

I've never rode a mountain bike. WIll have to have a go.


If your friend's a bit of an urban ninja – How about a stealthy Cannondale BadBoy?


----------



## 3narf (17 Mar 2011)

I read somewhere that at one point, in the '90s, about 99% of all bikes sold in the UK were mountain bikes.

Road bikes are gradually becoming popular again, but the chances are if you ask someone to visualise a bicycle, it will have chunky tyres and a suspension fork.

They are ingrained in our consciousness, perceived as being able to do anything (which they can, with a bit of effort).

If when the European Commission tell me I'm only allowed to have one bicycle, it'll be a hardtail mountain bike. I suspect a lot of people feel the same way...


----------



## Fnaar (17 Mar 2011)

MTBs are the 'default' choice for bikes with Joe Public... I know various non-regular-cycling people at work who've got bikes recently (without asking my opinion, the fools) and each has got a BSO/MTB with suspension on the suspension and chunks on top of the chunks on the tyres. It's like cheese... when people want bog-standard cheese, they think of cheddar.


----------



## snailracer (17 Mar 2011)

Before the mountain bike craze there was the 10-speed craze - cheap road "racing" bikes with weak wheels, feeble brakes and delicate frames. Modern road bikes haven't managed to shake off this image of mechanical inadequacy in the mind of the general public, which is why chunky mountain bikes are the default and more popular choice.

Also a "BSO" mountain bike or hybrid costs £70 - there is no equivalent road bike at that price point.


----------



## 3narf (17 Mar 2011)

Fnaar said:


> It's like cheese... when people want bog-standard cheese, they think of cheddar.



Yeah, but there's a reason cheddar is so popular- it's the best cheese in the world. Especially farmhouse mature.

What's a 'BSO?' Bog Standard... Oriental?


----------



## Moodyman (17 Mar 2011)

marzjennings said:


> If the objective is for your friend to get fit through cycling, then a heavy mtb with chunky tyres will do him far better than a light weight roadie frame with slicks.
> 
> *If I had to choose one bike to keep, it would be a mountain bike.
> *



I agree. If I could only have one bike, I'd get a mountain bike.

They're very versatile.


----------



## Brommyboy (17 Mar 2011)

The RSF members have only fairly recently used MTBs: for years ordinary cycles have been used off road. I use a touring cycle or my folder for ALL my cycling and it is not solely on tarmac! MTBs are a late 70s American invention.


----------



## Panter (17 Mar 2011)

3narf said:


> Yeah, but there's a reason cheddar is so popular- it's the best cheese in the world. Especially farmhouse mature.
> 
> What's a 'BSO?' Bog Standard... Oriental?



BSO: Bicycle Shaped Object


----------



## jethro10 (17 Mar 2011)

Quite an emotive dislike of MTB's





However I have one, my only bike, a hardtail. It's comfortable - simple.

I can do everything there is on an MTB, from cycling with friends on country lanes, to red routes at 7staines.
I can't do many of those things on a road bike.

so I'm slower on a road, so what. At least I'm looking over a hedge at the scenery rather than at the tarmac getting a sore back.

I can't see that anything other than an MTB can be that versatile and comfortable really.

It's like hatchback cars, invented what, in the 70's now everyone has one. Maybe not the best cars in the world, but truly versatile, like a (proper) MTB.

Jeff


----------



## Panter (17 Mar 2011)

jethro10 said:


> Quite an emotive dislike of MTB's
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Fully agree Jeff, if I could only have one bike then, as above, it would be a hardtail.

I think the point was just that they're the primary bike of choice when there is never any intention of taking it off road.
I love mountain bikes, in fact I have two


----------



## jethro10 (17 Mar 2011)

Panter said:


> I think the point was just that they're the primary bike of choice when there is never any intention of taking it off road.



Well that would be marketing and the Macho appeal? like kids wanting go faster stripes and Carlos Fandango wheels on their car.

Or possibly, are even casual people led by the probability of versatility? it's a distinct possibility.........

Perhaps we need to re-name MTB's as "all round bikes".


Jeff


----------



## Alan Whicker (17 Mar 2011)

Mountain bikes make excellent all-rounders if they're set up properly to do the intended job. I've got two MTBs. An alu Spesh Hardrock and a steel Ridgeback 640. Both are rigid, have slick tyres and riser bars. Perfect for knocking around at a decent speed, comfy and tough as teak. The Ridgeback is actually a homebrew singlespeed pub/tube beater but it's a hoot to ride.


----------



## uphillstruggler (17 Mar 2011)

just to add my two penny's worth.

i have both types, a very old Ridgeback 604lt that is pretty bombproof for knocking around on with the kids, around the red cycle paths etc, its also unlikely to get knicked (now i have said it) it is a do all bike, considering you can put slicks on it and do reasonably long rides if necessary, all of the above is not really true of the Giant Rapid i have.

if it is just for generally getting fit as was said in the OP, then the mountain bike is surely more adaptable as time goes on.

he will want a road bike soon enough anyway! 

get him to buy a decent one and buy it off him in 6 months - thats what friends are for.


----------



## Mad at urage (17 Mar 2011)

Alan Whicker said:


> Mountain bikes make excellent all-rounders if they're set up properly to do the intended job. I've got two MTBs. An alu Spesh Hardrock and a steel Ridgeback 640. Both are rigid, have slick tyres and riser bars. Perfect for knocking around at a decent speed, comfy and tough as teak. The Ridgeback is actually a homebrew singlespeed pub/tube beater but it's a hoot to ride.


This. Mine are a Specialised Hardrock Comp (steel) and a Dawes Disco 301 (hybrid). Dawes is for bimbling with family.

Favourite is definitely the hardrock (with Schwalb slicks, matt black paint, mudguards, rear carrier and 7-speed hub). Versatile, comfy, can go 'aero' on the bar ends when I want - What need of skinny tyres or drop bars? This thing goes along muddy or stoney trails and tarmac; it has been hit by cars and jumped off kerbs (when cycle lanes end) with 16 stone of me on it. Once it was a "Mountain Bike", now it is a versatile all-rounder.


----------



## Browser (17 Mar 2011)

jethro10 said:


> Perhaps we need to re-name MTB's as "all round bikes".
> Jeff



They already exist, they're called cyclocross bikes..........


----------



## blubb (17 Mar 2011)

Well if your roads in the city are bad, especially after this strong winter a mountain bike makes sense. However i prefer to use a normal city bike and just use the mountain bike for the woods.


----------



## Fnaar (17 Mar 2011)

jethro10 said:


> Quite an emotive dislike of MTB's
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yes I have one too, and do all that stuff on it, leaving my roadie for the road... I wouldn't be without the (old) hardtail MTB to be honest, I use the two bikes for totally different things. I think the point being made is that it's what people automatically assume 'buying a bike' means, when there might be more appropriate choices (or it might just be the right choice for many... it's just that there a lot of poor quality bikes sold to Joe Public)


----------



## NorrisCole (17 Mar 2011)

I appreciate that if your looking for one bike only, or can hypothetically only ever own one bike then a MTB is a good choice.
Thing is, like the OP points out, I would guess that thousands of bikes a year are sold and then only ever used on tarmac/very light off-road (which a cyclo-x could handle).
I'm not sure why this is really, people just don't get that if your looking to go anywhere on tarmac quickly then road bike is the way to go.
I think that the big problem is that people only really have experience of a MTB BSO. Which is slow and crap. But the big point is that they only spent say £100 on it. To those people spending over £400 on an entry level road bike is crazy as they can't appreciate the massive increase in speed, durability and comfort they will get because they have only ever known rubbish bikes, which have all been fairly evenly rubbish.
So you might say the solution is to roll out cheapo road bikes for £100, but then these would be pretty crap and probably do road bikes a disservice and put people off. So people wouldn't get a fair impression of a good road bike.
They just don't get that if you want to go fast, road bike is answer.


----------



## Hydra (17 Mar 2011)

I must admit, when I decided to start cycling 18 months ago (mainly to save bus fare so I could spend it on fags and weed) I opted for a mountain bike, even though I had no intention of going off-road. This turned out to be absolutely crap. In fact, the first day I rode it the handlebars and stem came loose as I was going downhill. Though this was entirely Hellfrauds fault...

As time's gone on I have become (I suppose) a proper cyclist (and btw there's no more ciggies or weed) and I've migrated to the 'road bike' side of things.

I can understand people defaulting on mountain bikes. I did, after all, but I didn't have the sterling information that this forum provides. And I didn't really expect to become immersed and obsessed with cycling. MTBs are the simple choice.


----------



## Mad at urage (17 Mar 2011)

NorrisCole said:


> I appreciate that if your looking for one bike only, or can hypothetically only ever own one bike then a MTB is a good choice.
> Thing is, like the OP points out, I would guess that thousands of bikes a year are sold and then only ever used on tarmac/very light off-road (which a cyclo-x could handle).
> I'm not sure why this is really, people just don't get that *if your looking to go anywhere on tarmac quickly t*hen road bike is the way to go.
> I think that the big problem is that people only really have experience of a MTB BSO. Which is slow and crap. But the big point is that they only spent say £100 on it. To those people spending over £400 on an entry level road bike is crazy as they can't appreciate the massive increase in speed, durability and comfort they will get because they have only ever known rubbish bikes, which have all been fairly evenly rubbish.
> ...


Agree with much of the above, but I think the bolded bit is a (possibly invalid) assumption. 

If most people are looking to go anywhere on tarmac quickly, a (sports) car or (if through traffic) motorbike is the way to go. I think that people have other considerations when buying a bike. 

Of course there's going somewhere without buying petrol, but there's also the idea (often sold, how often realised) of riding along (clean) dirt tracks past leafy trees under a blue sky. This doesn't sit well with the pragmatic decision about a road bike. 

In fact pragmatically (since most people won't cycle more than a few miles and most will want to carry more than the average lycra-clad cyclist), a SUAB complete with baskets both ends and a three-speed SA gear is the practical answer.


----------



## Norm (17 Mar 2011)

Browser said:


> They already exist, they're called cyclocross bikes..........


----------



## the_mikey (17 Mar 2011)

I don't mind mtb's but BSO's are heartbreakingly bad, I'm surprised how people persevere with them.


----------



## Rob3rt (17 Mar 2011)

marzjennings said:


> *If the objective is for your friend to get fit through cycling, then a heavy mtb with chunky tyres will do him far better than a light weight roadie frame with slicks.*
> 
> If I had to choose one bike to keep, it would be a mountain bike.




Thats if the terrible ride doesnt put him off cycling for good!


----------



## som3blok3 (17 Mar 2011)

I can relate to the OP. The sister-in-law bought herself a bike for Christmas with her bonus and wanted me to go along to help out. This involved a trip to Halfrauds to look at MTBs, _because MTBs are all she's ever owned_. After a few qualifying questions from me (well, the sales lad wasn't going to ask them) it turns out shes going to spend 80% of her time on road with the other 20% on towpaths up and down the Thames.

She left the shop £300 lighter (bike was in the sale), having bought a Hybrid with 1.6 tyres, a happy medium and a happy sister-in-law


----------



## Chris S (17 Mar 2011)

Like I've said before - I ride a MTB because of the poor quality of urban roads. You can bounce over pot holes instead of wrecking your wheels and coming off on them.


----------



## TVC (17 Mar 2011)

My experience talking to people at work is that they don't understand what's available and are confused by the jargon - urban, hybrid, fixie, hardtail etc. They know a bike by what they see in Halfords/Tesco/Argos and by what others seem to have. I guy I work with wouldn't go into the Local Bike Shop (LBS) because he felt intimidated and that you had to be a proper cyclist to buy anything from somewhere like that, so he bought from Halfords because that's where he goes for bits on his car, and he bought something he recognised, chunky tyres and suspension 'because that's good isn't it?'


----------



## gbb (17 Mar 2011)

I havn't read all the replys, but in my haste to advise people not to get BSA/MTBs...its easy to forget, they actually might perfer that kind of bike. Sometimes, you can't lead a horse to water, so's to speak.


----------



## mightyquin (17 Mar 2011)

I didn't like sushi, until I tried it.


----------



## mightyquin (17 Mar 2011)

Agree though, the state of the roads being what they are, a MTB might be essential!


----------



## NorrisCole (17 Mar 2011)

Chris S said:


> Like I've said before - I ride a MTB because of the poor quality of urban roads. You can bounce over pot holes instead of wrecking your wheels and coming off on them.



I agree that the roads are bad but would suggest that you are either 30 stone/doing something wrong if you have wrecked multiple wheels, either via poor buying choices or poor riding.
Even if you consider factory built road wheels not up to scratch (for inner city commuting I can sympathize) you could get a set of touring wheels or handbuilts.


----------



## PoweredByVeg (17 Mar 2011)

I find that I need an MTB for all the mountainous terrain here in Norfolk LOL!


----------



## youngoldbloke (18 Mar 2011)

It's like 4x4s - totally unnecessary for most people, now it seems everyone has one, or wants one - and most such vehicles never used off road. Fashion and marketing triumph, and what a waste of metal and rubber.


----------



## snailracer (18 Mar 2011)

^^
But if the cheapest "normal" car was 3 times more expensive than the cheapest 4x4, then 4x4's would be the rational choice.

When it comes to bikes, less material costs more.


----------



## 3narf (18 Mar 2011)

Economies of scale- more people buy mountain bikes, therefore they're cheaper.


----------



## tyred (18 Mar 2011)

MTBs are available everywhere and can probably be the cheapest introduction to cycling.

Besides, a road bike with drop bars, hard narrow saddle and stretched out riding position isn't for everyone. Since the demise of the traditional Raleigh 3-Speed type bikes, an MTB with slick tyres, rack and mudguards probably fill the void for a tough, durable, practical, easy to ride short distance utility bike for many people.

I have no idea why you would ride it with the standard off-road tyres unless you actually wanted to go off-road on a regular basis.


----------



## kishin (18 Mar 2011)

tyred said:


> I have no idea why you would ride it with the standard off-road tyres unless you actually wanted to go off-road on a regular basis.


It's probably just a combination of cost and understanding. How many people realise that knobblies make a bike harder to move and if you've only spent £70.00 on your bike, how likely are you to shell out for a pair of new tyres?


----------



## jackm (18 Mar 2011)

A year ago I decided a MTB was what I needed,as I live close to the Forest of Dean, and was going to cycle in it ay every opportunity.......so far, out of 750 miles covered, 20 have been done on forest tracks, doh..... I'm sure I'll make a more informed choice next time.


----------



## youngoldbloke (18 Mar 2011)

snailracer said:


> ^^
> But if the cheapest "normal" car was 3 times more expensive than the cheapest 4x4, then 4x4's would be the rational choice.
> 
> When it comes to bikes, less material costs more.



Only rational from the financial point of view - totally irrational otherwise. Just like buying a £70 BSO, or a £700 full suss MTB that you only ever slurp along tarmac on. It is also irrational to equip cheap bikes with knobbly tyres if they are mostly going to be used on the road - it is marketing hype and profit that drives all of this. 

Just noticed this is my 1000th post - I really must get out more ....


----------



## MontyVeda (18 Mar 2011)

I'd recommend a rigid MTB or maybe a hybrid... suspension is heavy and unecessary unless he's going to be off road most of the time.


----------



## snorri (18 Mar 2011)

The answer to the question in the thread title is, due to the poor standards of construction of segregated cycle routes.
I was with a road engineer, who uttered the dreaded phrase "I'm a cyclist myself" as we were looking over a segregated cycle route he had been responsible for constructing. After I had pointed out the failure to adequately drop the kerbs at a road crossing he told me I should get a mountain bike.


----------



## 3narf (19 Mar 2011)

We camped at Broadway Cottage campsite last year. Lovely spot!


----------



## Chris S (19 Mar 2011)

NorrisCole said:


> I agree that the roads are bad but would suggest that you are either 30 stone/doing something wrong if you have wrecked multiple wheels, either via poor buying choices or poor riding.
> Even if you consider factory built road wheels not up to scratch (for inner city commuting I can sympathize) you could get a set of touring wheels or handbuilts.



I'm actually 12 stone and 6 foot which is about right for a 45 year old.

I take your points about using hand-built or touring wheels but riding an off the shelf MTB is just a far cheaper option.


----------



## Lisa21 (19 Mar 2011)

marzjennings said:


> If the objective is for your friend to get fit through cycling, then a heavy mtb with chunky tyres will do him far better than a light weight roadie frame with slicks.
> 
> If I had to choose one bike to keep, it would be a mountain bike.



Ditto. when I got my bike it was to get me fit and healthy and to enjoy the countryside. Aside from the fact that I would kill a bike with skinny tyres the places I go, my thinking was i would get fitter quicker with a MTB than i would doing twice the miles with half the effort on a road bike. A decision i have never regretted.


----------



## Grendel (20 Mar 2011)

Sheffield_Tiger said:


> A mate of mine has been told to get some extra exercise, specifically cucling, by the doc to combat hypertension. Now, he doesn't drive so he'll not be loading the bike and taking it off-road - and I know him too well, he doesn't like going somewhere just for the enjoyment of the journey - on holidays he'd rather watch DVDs or find a pub then go for a walk "just to go and come back again - what's the point?" - so I know for a fact he won't get as far as cycling out to the peak district to use an off-road bike. It's not that he's lazy, he does have active hobbies such as airsoft, he just can't see the enjoyment in the journey.
> 
> He's asked me to help him choose a bike, and has come back with an example of the bikes he likes
> 
> ...


Have you seen the potholes in Glasgow?


----------



## jethro10 (21 Mar 2011)

Me and the Wife took my Bro In Law out this saturday round the Fells over Loweswater lake.
He's not a cyclist per-se, not dedicated, not a person who knows the difference between a cassette and a double and bash


He has a £300 Claude butler MTB and has had for 2-3 years and only did road miles.
This was his first foray offroad. he loved it and couldn't have done it with a different bike.

He was so worked up with pleasure when we got back he was totally hyped. As we loaded the bikes onto the rack, two road cyclists went by.
He commented "those bikes are for folks who wont have a go, those are" (meaning wont go off road - they have limited themselves by choosing only to do roads)

Joking aside, he's kinda right. An MTB will do anything - it's the only bike available to do anything - so unless your a dedicated hobbyist, it's the best choice of bike I guess.

He's coming round the fells near Keswick with us this weekend. Can't stop him now - this week, he's getting pedals with pins as his feet were slipping - we've created a monster ;-)

Jeff


----------



## martynjc1977 (21 Mar 2011)

I'm lucky enough to have both as an option. Got the Marin for tagging with the family and off road jaunts at Dalby, and me Trek 1.5 for commuting and training.

The MTB came first tho as it could do everything I needed, it's just real slow feeling on the road.


----------



## Norm (21 Mar 2011)

Those who think an MTB is the choice for those wanting a bike to do anything should try a cx-style bike.


----------



## jethro10 (21 Mar 2011)

Norm said:


> Those who think an MTB is the choice for those wanting a bike to do anything should try a cx-style bike.



your possibly right, but it seems the answer to this thread is the answer to this comment.
They are not very well marketed, a lot of non-cyclists have never heard of this type of bike. also I bet they don't hit the same price point as MTB's even though being seemingly simpler bikes. So again the newcomer seems VFM in MTB's

Marketing has a lot to answer for :-(

J


----------



## oliglynn (21 Mar 2011)

always used to ride a mtb up til when I left uni - I had a Specialized Hardrock, and was oblivious to the world of road bikes.

It wasn't until I tried keeping up with a mate on a road bike that I noticed how much of a difference it really made.

Then the hardrock got nicked, and replaced it with a Hybrid as I was mainly riding on roads. The difference in speed was amazing.

I now ride a road bike, and the hybrid is there as my winter commuter / spare.

Sometimes feel the urge to off-road it, but generally unless you live near some good trails it requires a bit more organisation than just jumping on the road bike for a blast. 

Although I'd like to go out mtbing this summer, I'm not sure I could justify spending hundreds on a bike that I'd use only once in a while! Think i'll just get some knobbly tyres for the hybrid if anything!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (21 Mar 2011)

Instead of thinking MTB thing ATB (All Terrain Bike). You can ride a ATB / MTB anywhere you choose. May not be as fast on the road as a drop handled bar but it will ride on the roads, on forest trails, at trail centres, etc, etc. This is why I think they are so popular.


----------



## tyred (21 Mar 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Instead of thinking MTB thing ATB (All Terrain Bike). You can ride a ATB / MTB anywhere you choose. May not be as fast on the road as a drop handled bar but it will ride on the roads, on forest trails, at trail centres, etc, etc. This is why I think they are so popular.



How many people actually do venture off-road on a bike? I mean proper off-road, over rocks, through mud, etc. 

I have happily and safely rode an old three speed over gravel paths through forests and across fields in the summer time, even passing teenagers on proper "mountain" bikes. For most people, having a bike a with knobbly tyres is the equivalent of driving a Range Rover 500 yards along a tarmac road to buy a newspaper.


----------



## Fnaar (21 Mar 2011)

[QUOTE 1339821"]
Oi, there is nothing bog standard about Cheddar 
[/quote]












I refer the right-honourable gentleman to the amount of times the terms coincide in a google search :
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=bo...=1I7GGIC&redir_esc=&ei=6WuHTZ2dB42DhQfR34m4BA


----------



## Angelfishsolo (21 Mar 2011)

That is up to the individual. It gives the option of all terrain which I think is most important.



tyred said:


> How many people actually do venture off-road on a bike? I mean proper off-road, over rocks, through mud, etc.
> 
> I have happily and safely rode an old three speed over gravel paths through forests and across fields in the summer time, even passing teenagers on proper "mountain" bikes. For most people, having a bike a with knobbly tyres is the equivalent of driving a Range Rover 500 yards along a tarmac road to buy a newspaper.


----------



## youngoldbloke (21 Mar 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> That is up to the individual. It gives the option of all terrain which I think is most important.



Are you referring to the Range Rover or MTB? - the same comment could apply to both .


----------



## Angelfishsolo (21 Mar 2011)

LOL. The difference is that one doesn't drink fuel like it's going out of fashion and pollute the atmosphere 


youngoldbloke said:


> Are you referring to the Range Rover or MTB? - the same comment could apply to both .


----------



## Sheffield_Tiger (21 Mar 2011)

Success!

He's off to buy a Carrera Subway - on budget and IMO just the right sort of bike for a short commute (his ride is only 1.3 miles each way though the plan is to take a few detours) and some general leisure rides including some light trail

He's NEVER (by his own admission) going to take it properly "mountain biking"


----------



## subaqua (21 Mar 2011)

I have to agree with the comment about CX bikes not being very well known. 

still happy with my MTB and gave it some aggro in epping at the weekend. looking forward to Thetford in 3 weeks, but meanwhile i will still be riding to work on it as i can just continue to the forest if i feel like it on the way home.


----------



## peelywally (21 Mar 2011)

mightyquin said:


> How did people cycle up and down mountains before mountain bikes came along? I've found a book on bikes from 1979 and the term 'mountain bike' doesn't appear anywhere, nor are there any obvious equivalents!
> 
> I think most uninformed people see chunky tyres and suspension and just assume that's going to be better than a rigid frame and skinny wheels!



i might be wrong but im sure the mtb was a purpose built bike for a Himalayan trip or somewhere similar , it featured on an episode of blue peter i think ,

and was based on a road bike and hippy downhill racing bikes , it was a solid frame bike i think and raliegh again i think brought out a high street version the amazon ?


----------

