Main differences between road & hybrid bikes......?

[DDYB]

Folks,

Supposing I had the exact same wheels and tyres (say 700cc 28mm) on a road bike & hybrid bike, other than drop/flat handlebars what are the main differences between the two?

I'm quite new to this so the obvious differenece is the handlebars but I'm interested to find out what the other (not so obvious) main differences are.

Any input appreciated.

Thanks.

 

[Radius]

The road bike would most likely be lighter, and possibly less 'comfortable' although that is debatable. It would be built for speed rather than sort of ruggedness.

 

[Abitrary]

I have a very light aluminium road bike with carbon forks and seatpost, and a quite heavy aluminium hybrid bike with steel forks.

The road bike is infinitely more comfortable for general riding and commuting, as it is lighter. A light bike bike doesn't bounce around under you so much, so you expend less energy controlling it.

The hybrid takes bigger tyres and is better when the ground is slippy. The wider handlebars are also more manoevorable and safer in traffic. I also don't care about bumping it up kerbs etc. as it is ultimately more robust yet cheap.

 

[MajorMantra]

Isn't the important difference geometry? I realise that 'hybrid' is a marketing term without a precise defition but I thought the essential idea behind them was combining relaxed mountain bike geometry and riding position with the light weight and slimmer wheels of road bikes. Bars aren't the important difference since there are 'proper' road bikes that have flat bars.

Matthew

 

[gbb]

One other main difference is the gearing..
Apart from top end hybrids, chainsets tend to be a 48/38, where of course roadbikes tend to be 50/34 or 53/39 (or thereabouts). Cassettes tend to have a wider range on a hybrid too. The net result is a slower but easier ride.

 

[Tynan]

lighter, quicker, faster to accelerate

and the drop position makes you go quicker and is a blessing in a headwind, I used to hate headwinds, now they're just a mild annoyance, I find mine perfectly comfortable

mind you, you're honour bound to pass anyone not on a road bike obviously

 

[HLaB]

The term hybrid covers a wide range some hybrids are basically flat bar road bikes and IMO identical in almost every sense to a road bike, apart from the drops. Other hybrids are more mtb orientated, heavier , lower gearing, etc.

 

[tyred]

I would have thought that the frame geometry would be different in most case.

 

[jimboalee]

+1 on MajorMantra.

Yes, road bikes are lighter therefore easier to get up hills and accelerate, but 'Hybrids' are more stable and roll with less effort due to their greater inertia.

Light road bikes are susceptible to crosswinds. They require more anticipation along hedgerows with open gates.
Road bikes usually have a steeper head angle, which adds to the stability loss over 'Hybrids'.

Gearing is a function of weight. A 'Hybrid' is for a person who intends to have a comfortable ride to work, carrying their lunch and stuff on a rack or in panniers.
Road bikes are for a 'blast' in the country with no luggage, only a PRK.

Half way between a road bike and a 'Hybrid' is the Audax bike, to add more to the confusion.

A tourer is on the other side of the 'Hybrid'. It is even more rugged and lower geared.

 

[ed_o_brain]

There's so much variation on the 'hybrid' theme, it's best to look at it bike, by bike.

For example,
a road bike is maybe more stable than a hybrid which is literally just a flat barred version of the road bike because you can, on the drops, achieve a lower centre of gravity.

And some of the road bikes with more relaxed angles or forks with extra trail will be more stable than some of the sportier hybrids.

I've reached the stage where I think the rider makes the biggest difference. If I'm on the road bike and conditions are a little choppy, then I take it easy. If I'm on my skinny tyred MTB and I want to go a bit faster, I have to work a bit harder.

Choice of bike is a very personal thing.

Most manufacturers broadly speaking will sell:
- TT/Tri bikes
- no compromise race orientated road bikes (racing bikes)
- practical or comfy road bikes
- fast/slick/sporty hybrids
- general purpose hybrids
- 'city bikes'
- trail hybrids
- tourers

Some of these will be cross overs with cyclocross bikes, others are aimed specifically at commuters, others at audaxers, fast tourers, slow go anywhere tourers, sportive riders.

If there's some kind of market, generally manufacturers will try and cater to it.

Best thing to do is get thee self down to a bike shop and try a few.
Or even better, find a friend of similar height and a veritable stable who will let you try a few of his (or even her) steeds. Bike shop test rides are never really long enough.

After five years of everyday cycling I still can't really answer the question which bike I most like to ride.

 

[marinyork]

Can I ask where a specialised roubaix would fit on this scale?

 

[Randochap]

Can I ask where a specialised roubaix would fit on this scale?

Why don't we let Specialized themselves tell us:

Endurance Road

Smooth, fast and engineered to temper even the roughest roads, these endurance bikes strike the perfect balance between performance and compliance. From the race-caliber Roubaix (2008 Paris-Roubaix winner) ....


It's a racing bike; albeit one built to take the abuse of pavé.

This thread sure has occasioned some big generalizations, based on the OP question. Since, as others have metioned, the term "hybrid" has been attached by the industry to so many bikes, it's not surprising that mass confusion has arisen around the category.

This has been covered elsewhere, but bears repeating. Hybrids run the gamut from "performance" lightweights with 700c wheels and narrow tyres, to 26" wheel "city" hybrids, some even sporting front shocks, making them almost indistinguishable from hardtail mountain bikes. The defining characteristic I suppose is the flat bar (in a variety of styles).

In my opinion, it would be very nice to see the industry drop the "hybrid" term (introduced after the mountain bike frenzy to distinguish the rediscovered utility bicycle) and concentrate on designing a "proper" commuter-type bike.

I think we are on our way to seeing this happen in a more general way, with several companies introducing practical commuting and "work" bikes. Think: Surly, Kona and Electra, as an example.

But we are still a ways from an affordable, durable city bike. I wouldn't be surprised to see the reintroduction of a simple, mass-produced steel commuter in the near future.

But back to the original question, A "true hybrid" will have lower gears and geometry that will allow the addition of mudguards and wider tyres. It will have upright handlebars. That's it in a nutshell.

Clearly, upright bars are not necessarily de rigueur on a city bike, but if I was going to use my Rivendell Bleriot as a city bike (which I often do) specifically, then I would install some sort of upright bar. Many others have set the Bleriot up in this way and it makes a beautiful, if rather expensive, utility bike.

I was surprised last year to see very few practical bikes in the UK. The country that set me on a lifetime love affair with the bicycle had forgotten what a basic bike looks like. The country seemed to be overun with cheap, ill-constructed, department store mountain bikes!

Let's hope, with the continuing decline of car culture, we rediscover the basic commuter bicycle. It will be a lot easier to define than "hybrid."

For more on commuting in general, check out my commuter hub.

 

[skwerl]

Can I ask where a specialised roubaix would fit on this scale?

it's a sportive biike

 

[marinyork]

Ah thanks. I don't think I'll be doing a sportive any time soon but looking into audaxes. I was thinking of leaving Hybrids R Us and getting a 2nd bike, one with thinner tyres, one with dropped handlebars, comfortable and used for long rides (60 miles+) and be able to take some hammer on the roads whilst still being fast.

 

[Disgruntled Goat]

More tyre clearance. Slacker geometry.