I think you would be much better off converting an old kids trailer .

They can be found pretty cheap on Craigslist.

There are trailers in a similar form factor, like the Burley Travoy (no recommendation, just the first I found), that are made for the purpose.

These will be a lot more stable than any home made conversion of something that was never designed to go faster than slow walking pace.

For my daily commute and for moderate sized weekly grocery trips I use two waste baskets, permanently mounted, each with 6 gallon capacity.

They serve as waterproof hard shells into which I can insert any bags, backpacks, clothes etc, that I want.

I go grocery shopping with my bike all the time, I put groceries in touring panniers mounted on a rear rack.

They are a little cumbersome to load

but I can fit a lot of stuff.

You can't fit a week's worth of groceries for a family of 5, though, so it depends on your situation.

For a solution more elegant for shopping, you can buy square-shaped shopping panniers which will more easily allow you to carry canvas shopping bags full of groceries.

These are very popular in Holland where bikes are a primary mode of transit.

( http://dutchbikeshop.ie/wp-content/uploads/wp-checkout/images/fastrider-pannier-cargo-1423825156.jpg ) One word of caution for most bikes in the US-- you'll have to watch out for heel clearance with a square bag like this.

If you're serious about hauling a lot of stuff then you should get a cargo bike, like the Surly Big Dummy or something with a frame-mounted front rack (Workcycles).

There are several manufacturers who offer rod supported quick connect pannier bags which you can easily detach from your bikes rear rack, shop and load them, then rehook to the bike and ride home.

They work great and are inexpensive.

One such company is Performance Bicycle.

I agree with Blams comment, I don't think you would want to pull that cart behind a bike.

Since you still want to take it into the store, maybe use that cart & mount it on a flatbed trailer with bungee cords.

Something like this maybe: http://www.burley.com/page_453/flatbedsuptmsup

Many grocery stores do deliveries.

There's also taxis.

Living without a car and having to get groceries for my family has taught me that bicycles aren't always the best solution.

About once a month plan a big trip and get a list of all the heavy, non-perishables items you will need.

This will include canned goods, frozen meats and vegetables, dried goods like pasta or rice, and other non food items like laundry soap.

The other stuff you need to bet fresh doesn't weigh that much.

Exceptions are things like milk, but sometimes I make a special trip just for that.

It's an excuse to ride my bike more, and I just go to the corner store because it's only a short trip, and it's the same price everywhere.

Also, learn to shop light.

Don't buy liquids like pop or juice.

Water is healthier anyway and comes right out of a pipe fed into your house.

If you want juice, try frozen concentrate.

You'll spend money on deliveries, about $8 a shot here, but you won't have to buy a trailer, and surely your bike will appreciate not having to tow heavy loads.

Question: Can I take a shopping cart like say  this one  and safely attach it to a bike? I'd like to also take it into the store with me as well.

Grocery Shopping by bike, expanding my cargo options cheaply

For daily grocery shopping on a bike panniers seem to be the preferred option. For larger shopping trips, a trailer of some kind or a cargo bike are recommended. Maybe it is a good idea to consider deliveries for the monthly shop. It is important to learn to shop light and avoid buying liquids as much as possible.

It could be better to convert a kids trailer or use a trailer similar to that shopping cart like the Burley Travoy. Cargo bikes or frame-mounted racks provide more luggage space on the bike itself, and are designed for this purpose. You may not need to transport as much shopping if you plan monthly trips for heavy non-perishable items or have shopping delivered.

Pannier racks would be more elegant and suitable for a bike.

It could be better to convert a kids trailer or use a trailer similar to that shopping cart like the Burley Travoy. Cargo bikes or frame-mounted racks provide more luggage space on the bike itself.


Yes, you can use them with normal shoes, but as you predict, it isn't very comfortable, especially if your shoes have thin, flexible soles.

Also, there's a risk of your foot slipping off, particularly in the wet.

There are various options to temporarily convert clip pedals into ordinary flat ones.

Fly pedals

BBB BPD FeetRest pedal adaptors (SPD only)

UPDATE:

I use Fly Pedals now when I want to convert my clipless pedals into regular pedals.

They are made of machined aluminum, light weight, and lock together so you can put them in your pocket.

They cost $50 plus cleats.

enter link description here

This company (started on Kickstarter) makes flat platforms with straps on top and cleats on the bottom.

They convert clipless pedals into toe clips.

A pair runs $55 without the actual cleats.

There is nothing to stop you from getting on your bike in regular trainers instead of shoes with cleats.

you won't damage your pedals in any way as long as you don't have a rock lodged in the sole of your shoe.

The problem, as far as I can see it, is that it is just not very comfortable due to the small surface area and flexible sole of the shoe.

Your feet will feel the pressure localized into a very small area.

The other issue is grip.

There isn't a lot of traction since the body of the pedal wasn't designed with that in mind.

I do my own mechanics out if my garage and will occasionally hop on the bike I'm working on to make sure my repair or adjustment is working properly.

I have bikes with Ritchey Logic, Speedplay frogs, SpeedPlay Zeros, Shimano SPD and non-clipless pedals.

I don't go and put on the proper shoes just to ride down the street and back while I test an adjustment.

So, yes, you can ride without shoes with cleats but really only in a very limited way.

Yes you can.

No it's not going to be comfortable.

You're more likely to slip off the pedals.

One alternative is to get double sided pedals where one side of the pedal has an SPD mount and the other side is a flat pedal.

I've been running Shimano M324 pedals on my commuter

so I can hop on with casual shoes or use my cycling shoes for more power on longer rides.

It's the worst of both worlds, so you'll find yourself trying to flip the pedal from time to time, but it's a doable option that gives you flexibility without having to swap pedals all the time.

Unfortunately, I don't know of any other type of shoe / cleat combination that works with dual sided pedals.

It seems that only shimano mountain SPD seems to offer this option.

If you're already sold on road pedals, then it's probably not going to work like this.

You might just want to invest in a set of flat pedals and swap your pedals when you want to ride without clipless shoes.

I have used normal office shoes on look road pedals (albeit shoes with relatively thick soles)

This works fine for to/from work or lunchtime errands.

However I found that pedalling on the "underside" of the pedal was more comfortable in some thin-soled shoes.

Not ideal but workable.

Another option, try clipping a plastic cleat in the pedal, an older and worn-out one would be perfect.

Plus you can remove it when you want to ride with proper shoes.

I have look clipless on my road bike, but I put platforms back on my MTB for trips around town, mostly because our roads are still terrible, and the MTB has better brakes and more load-carrying capacity.

Cleats may not be best for you.

Don’t wear sneakers over clip-less pedals!

Didn’t feel bad then

but when I woke up with ball area of the foot swollen with terrible pain.

Icing as I text.

I knew better too.

Question: Is it possible to use regular trainers/shoes (i.e., withou cleats) with clipless pedals?  A friend of mine mentioned he does this all the time. However, I cannot imagine how this would work. Surely the area of grip would be far too small to get any kind of purchase on the pedals.  We both have  Shimano PD-R540 SPD  pedals.

Can I use "normal" shoes/trainers with clipless pedals?

You can ride a bike in normal shoes without cleats but there are some disadvantages. First, the shoe will tend to slip off the pedal. Second, it will feel uncomfortable for the rider. It is, however, possible to convert your clip pedals into flat ones or you can get double-sided pedals. Alternatively, you could get a set of flat pedals to use when you don't want to wear cleats.

You can use normal shoes without damaging your pedals, but the pedals will be uncomfortable and slip easily. A better solution might be to switch to double-sided or flat pedals, or use adapters that temporarily convert clipless pedals to flat pedals.

Fly Pedals are clips that temporarily convert clipless pedals to flat pedals.

A better solution might be to switch to double-sided or flat pedals.


The single-legged fork must truly withstand heavier bending forces than conventional forks, simply due to physics and asymmetricity.

But because of its different construction, the fork is actually stiffer than most

2-legged. Pros The top is attached like a dual crown downhill fork, which is much stiffer than a single-crown.

The wheel axle is one-piece with the bottom part, which is stiffer than a quick-release axle (which is not solid at all) and on same level as a 15 thru-axle or 20 thru-axle.

This design is used also on cars where the wheel doesn't have support from the other side.

The biggest difference is inside.

While normal forks have round tubes that slide on oil film, the Lefty uses needle bearings on a square profile (same as the front leg of Boeing airliners.): Such solution works with almost same friction under heavy side-loads, whereas sliding tubes, when side-loaded (uneven compression of legs), do get friction losses (rolling resistance wins).

Having conventional fork with one leg wouldn't work, such a fork would get stuck.

Having bearing-fitted 2-legged fork is an overkill and unnecessary weight.

The heaviest Lefty is still lighter than lightest carbon 2-legged.

You can replace the tire without removing the wheel.

Cons

If you need to remove the front wheel, you need to remove the brake caliper also.

The axle works only with Cannondale hubs.

The front of bike will look unbalanced until you get used to it.

Pre-2013 models of Lefty are not sealed, having the bearings track just under a rubber sleeve.

This required almost constant maintenance.

Post-2013 models have a rubber-sealed leg with bearings further inside and with one plain bearing at the bottom which allows for service intervals as normal forks: Previous models, as some bikers on forums complained, had more linear action: they were easier to bottom than normal forks.

So now the newer ones should have more progressive compression.

(This is opinion based, but quite a lot of it online, there are no measurements.)

A Lefty is much harder to service than a normal fork.

You need a couple of special tools, and the assembly is complicated.

My experience with Lefty goes back to 2000 when I purchased my Cannondale

Super V. One thing I've liked about it

how easy it is to 'turn off'.

There's a small dial at the top that disengages the suspension - good when transitioning onto solid road riding.

As mentioned above by another post, the center of balance is altered.

The implication of which is that it is more difficult to ride 'hands free'.

Sometimes I ride hands free with it just to practice my balancing skills.

I seem to remember that the original intent was that lefty offered a longer(higher) range of motion and thus the bike was able to handle more adverse terrain.

I'm not sure if that's actually true, but it sounded good at the time.

If you do get one, you'll find it to be a conversation piece.

Since it hasn't been widely adopted, I'd imagine that the benefits are not overwhelming.

And one last thing, I've always considered the bike to be "much more of a bike than I am a man".

Pro: You can run oversize and plus size tyres on a lefty.

Like everyone, the first time I saw this fork I find it obvious that it must be weaker than conventional forks... Until I realized that conventional forks are not symmetrical at all.

One side is the spring (air or metal spring) and the other side is the damper.

This means the sides always works against each other.

The fork is teared a on its sides and it do not behave exactly the same whether you turn left or right.

The forces are not applied to the same side of the plunger and it does not slide evenly on both sides.

Having damper and spring on the same axle is a good point for the lefty.

Unfortunately we cannot do blind test on bikes, but it would surely give lefty more points.

Con: Because there is only one side on the fork, it limits you to using disc brakes only, since there is no place to mount any type of rim brake solution.

Pro: There is no "fork," so mud and other hub-bub will not get stuck in the front as much.

I'd add:

Pro:probably less width overall, good for extreme mountain/trail bikingCon:center of balance is shifted off center line of tire.

Question: Looks like they save some weight, but how do they have a better strength/weight ratio than a traditional two legged fork?   With the single-legged fork the fork and axle must resist huge bending all the time, producing even more of a problem than with the 2-legged fork under uneven compression.  So how is this fork constructed and what advantages and disadvantages does this bring?

Pros and cons of single-sided forks (Cannondale Lefty)?

Advantages of a Lefty: lighter, the tire can be replaced without removing the wheel, you can run oversize and plus size tires, there is no fork so mud, etc. will not get stuck in the front as much, damper and spring on the same axle. Disadvantages of a Lefty: You can only use disc brakes, it is harder to service, it feels unbalanced at first, the axle works only with Cannondale hubs, to remove the front wheel you need to remove the brake caliper.

Car wheels are also supported on only one side, so this is not as risky as it might seem. Normal bike forks have a damper and spring on different sides, so they are not symmetrical either. The needle bearings are also more resistant to friction losses under side loads than normal sliding tubes. While this system is light, easy to adjust for different road surfaces and reduces collection of mud, it is harder to service and can only be used with Cannondale hubs and disc brakes. Replacing a tyre is easier, but removing a wheel requires the brake calipers to be removed too.


You have a couple different options.

I think the cheapest would be to switch to a compact crankset which would change the front chainrings from 52-39 to 50-34.

I'm pretty sure you could do this while still using the same shifter.

Changing the front shifter is required if you want to go from a double to a triple, as is changing the front derailleur.

If you switch to a compact I'm pretty sure you can keep the same derailleur and shifter.

Another thing you'll want to look out for is the rear derailleur.

You currently have a short cage derailleur, and you may need a medium or long cage derailleur when you go with a compact crankset.

I don't think a triple should really be necessary on a 10 speed system.

I have triple, but I have an 8 speed cassette.

I find in that case the triple is nice because you can still get lots of gear range while still keeping the gears close together, However, on a 10 or 11 speed cassette, this isn't really necessary.

I think that switch to a compact crankset is a much better option.

Also, according to This post , the maximum cog size of a short cage Shimano short cage is 27 and the total drivetrain capacity is 29.

To use a larger cassette, you would have to switch out the rear derailleur.

If you used a compact crankset, you should be probably also replace your rear derailler for a medium cage, as your total capacity would be (50-34) + (27-12) = 31.

However, if you changed the cassette to a 12-25, you could get away with not replacing the rear derailleur and still getting a little bit lower gearing, although possibly not enough for your needs.

You'll need to swap out your left (front) shifter and front derailleur to utilize all three chainrings of a triple.

Between the cost of that and the cranks, I think a better option would be to swap out your rear cassette for something with more range.

Since you've already got a 12-27 on there, a 12-32 would give you

I believe the range you need.

My hunch is that you'd be able to fudge it with your current short cage rear derailleur, but a medium cage mechanism will probably be less hassle in the long run.

Since cassettes are consumables and need to be replaced periodically, this cost of the just rear mechanism is likely significantly less than the shifter, front mechanism, and the crankset.

When you say two lower gears, you presumably have 25 and 27 as the largest gears in your cassette.

Does that mean 39/31 would be low enough?

If so, the compact with a 34 will get you there, but 34/25 will be too high.

Shimano makes a 12/30 10speed cassette in the CS4600 line, which I have coupled to a 50/34 compact.

You will be in for a new rear derailleur that way.

They also make a 11/32 11speed, but that needs new shifter as well.

This might avoid the crankset change, however.

I wouldn't get a triple crankset, there's a reason why those are dying off of the market.

Consider instead changing your cassette and maybe your rings, if you're climbing a lot of steep hills and want a lower gear ratio, then what I would suggest trying first is swapping out your cassette with a mountain bike cassette, this may require you to also change your rear derailleur to a long arm derailleur, and you'll need a new chain, but you should change that whenever you change your cassette anyways.

If you need a little bit more, then try swapping your small ring with something smaller.

You'll save money this way too, because you won't have to change out your crank or your shifter.

When I made this change 15 years ago, as well as the new triple chain rings I needed to change the bottom bracket - cotterless square taper type - (which needed to be longer to correct the chain line), front derallieur (needs to be able to cope with extra travel and larger difference in chainring sizes) and rear derallieur (needs to be able to cope with larger total difference in teeth).

You will also need to change your shifter to use the new range on the front.

Question: I have a  2007 Specialized Tarmac Pro Double  and I need some better gearing. I am doing more hill climbs and I feel that I need at least two lower gears than I already have. What would be the most efficient way to upgrade my bike. Would it be easy to get a triple chainring? Will I have to get a new derailleur? What else would I need to change?

What is the easiest to upgrade my chainrings from a double to a triple?

There is some degree of disagreement about whether a new derailleur would be needed when moving from double to triple chain ring. Some think that by using a compact crankset, the original derailleur could be kept while others believe it would, nevertheless, be necessary to change the short cage derailleur for a medium or long cage. Others consider that even more part would need to be changed, for example the shifter.

A triple chainset could require changing the bottom bracket as well as the front derailleur and shifter. A compact crankset would be cheaper and allow you to keep most of your current components. You could also change the cassette to something more suitable to your needs.


I recommend removing the disc rotors when you travel with a bike regardless of the packaging method.

I have a hard sided case and have done the cardboard box thing

(my fat bike does not fit in my hard sided case).

Hard sided cases rely on compression to keep everything in place; compression against the flat side of a rotor is not a good thing.

Remove the rotors and pack them on each side of a piece of rigid material that will reinforce them and tape the whole thing up.

They can be easily put back on with the proper Torx wrench.

If this seems like overkill, keep in mind TSA WILL unpack your bike.

Do not bother closing a cardboard box before getting to the airport, because they will just cut it open.

I leave the box open and leave a roll of tape on top for them to seal it with.

I pack any loose items in the box with the understanding that they will be removed and likely reinserted in a different spot inside the box/case.

That being the case, you want loose items padded or enclosed in something for when they end up someplace you didn't intend them.

I usually make sure to take all the same tools I used to disassemble the bike and pack them as well (usually in a separate padded bag) in the same box/container.

I have always favored the center lock rotors because they were easier on and off for travel.

I have flown 6x with my bike (Cyclocross Disc) in a soft padded bike bag and never once had issues with the rotors.

Numerous other MTB friends never remove the rotors either and have not had trouble when flying.

Echoing the comment by @Daniel

, I'd be more focussed on the dropouts and RD and making sure those are supported.

You are way more at risk stripping / losing screws than bending a disc.

The wheels will be double padded by the wheel bag and the bike bag.

A torque wrench is definitely recommended, but some people develop a "feel" for the correct torque.

There is usually blue threadlocker compound on the screws.

There are small, cheap simple "flexion" torque keys that do the job quite well.

My MTB came with one, actually.

A few years late,

but I thought I'd share my two cents

- I recently flew with my mountain bike in an EVOC bike bag, and my front rotor did actually get bent out of shape beyond repair (according the local bike shop).

So, I would recommend always removing the rotors.

Since posting this question I went on a tour for a few months which involved flying with my bike twice.

Both times it was packed in a cardboard bike box from a bike shop.

It may have been unclear in my original question, but my question was specifically about the disc rotors, not how to pack a bike in general.

When searching elsewhere

I found there was lots of info about general bike packing, e.g. remove the rear derailleur

wrap it in padding, use a dummy axle for the fork, etc, but I didn't find a lot of info on disc brakes.

Anyway, to be safe I removed the rotors, interleaved them with sheets of clean paper towel to avoid contamination (so three sheets total), then sandwiched them between two squares of press-board, which I then wrapped with duct tape.

This may indeed be overkill

but I'm sure it can't hurt.

To keep the torx screws safe, I put them back in the holes they go in and screwed them in a few rotations.

When I put the brakes back on I did not use any special alignment tool or torque wrench, I just used the torx driver on my multi-tool and put them in by hand.

The thing ive found an issue isn't the rotors but actually the headset/stem (especially an integrated one piece setup) being the issue.

My friend has a Specialized Venge Vias (disc) and he obviously had to remove the headset to turn the bars to fit into the rigid bike case.

Removing the bar/stem means that there's no spare cable/hose

so he had to

have the brakes bled then re cabled when he arrived there and the same when he got back as they dont like being taken apart.

an expensive trip just to take a disc braked bike.

Question: I've been looking at a few tutorials on packing a bike to take it on a plane, and most of them make no mention of disc brakes. One did specifically mention disc brakes, and recommended taking the rotors off and sandwiching them between two small sheets of plywood to stop them getting bent or warped.   Any thoughts on this?   Can you just put them back on with the allen key bolts that attach them? Or do you need special alignment tools and a torque wrench?

Should disc brake rotors be removed when packing bike for travel?

Most people recommend removing the disc rotors before taking a bike on a plane as there is a riscK of them getting bent. However, others have flown with the bike intact and had no issues. General consensus is that they should be packed in a protective bag as should all loose items, like screws, that may get lost and the tools needed to replace them.

Some commenters suggest that the bike bag will provide enough protection without removing the rotors, but others disagree and recommend reinforcing, padding and storing them separately. A torque wrench should be used to disassemble the components, and the tools can be packed along with the bike for later assembly.


I'm going to say yes based on this photo.

It looks that the hole is big enough to pass over just about any axle, quick release or nutted.

I think what is throwing you off is that it comes with a quick release skewer that is longer than what is typically used for wheels.

You may not need that provided skewer.

Burley uses a similar one and I was able to put the hitch on a Jamis bike using the skewers that came with the bike.

If your bike has the internal gear hub, it probably has anti rotation washer (special washers to keep the axle from turning).

This hitch would mount to the outside of that washer.

I have a Chariot (now Thule) cart attached to my Brompton (with internal gears).

It has the standard adapter (similar to the one in the picture above) and works fine.

I didn't have to do any adaptations.

The only issue is that the cart leans forward due to the 20" wheel but my little one does just fine.

How much "like" does it have to be?

I have seen trailers that clamp onto the seat post.

These have the added advantage that when unhooked from the bike, you can use it like a hand truck.

I used to go grocery shopping with a Burley axle-mount, and had to rearrange the groceries when I lowered the tow-bar to axle height.

In one model I saw, the cargo compartment was easily removable from the frame and had straps to make it a backpack.

UPDATE: I now have a Cyclone IV Chubby .

On the road, my supplies go inside it.

When I get to an airport, I empty it, fold the Brompton and put it inside.

Surround it by whatever else will fit and check that in.

The rest goes in the backpack for carry-on.

Downside:

excess baggage fees Radical Design makes other trailers.

This person uses a child trailer with Brompton

This should work.

I use the Thule Chinook 1 with my Brompton folding bike.

The only inconvenience is that the front wheel is best not folded down but removed.

The clearance with the ground is too low.

But when you remove the front wheel, it works perfectly.

Based on this experience I would say yes!

Yes i can confirm that a Thule Chariot goes great on a Brompton.

The clearance from the road to the coupling is clearly lower than on a larger-wheeled bike but it handles well and has not slowed us down at all.

Question: I wonder if I can use a Brompton bike with a trailer like the Thule Chariot Cougar? It uses the so called  Thule Axle Mount  and I wonder if it is compatible to the bike. At this point, it is just advanced planning and I can't test the possible setup. What do you think, any experiences?

Can I use a Brompton bike with a trailer like the Thule Chariot Cougar?

Many cyclists confirm that a Thule Chariot goes great on a Brompton. There may be a few little issues to deal with, like slight leaning forwards, but nothing major.

Yes, this is possible, but the weight should be adjusted to prevent the cart leaning forward too much. The front wheel should also be removed rather than folded away due to the low clearance. Other trailers that clamp to the seat post may be easier.


This is what I tell everyone to get first when they get a new bike: Seatbag, to hold the following: Spare tube (maybe two) Small multitool Mini-pump or CO2 inflator Tire patch kit 2x tire levers That assumes you have bidons and cages.

Those six things should get you by for many miles and should get you out of any trailside emergencies.

As with anything though, make sure you know how to use them when the need arises.

For your own personal bike shop, I'd recommend a good floor pump with a pressure gauge, some high quality chain lube, and a maintenance book for DIY repairs.

Also a helmet should be entirely recommended as a required purchase, and probably front and rear lights.

Nothing hurts worse then getting hit by a motorist that "didn't see you" at an intersection.

Bicycle Helmet Suitable clothing and shoes Cellphone

Whatever else you "need" depends on your mechanical abilities and how independent you wish to be.

I would go for a good floor pump, as I find it can be extremely important in preventing flats.

One big problem I see is underinflated tires.

This can cause flats and other problems like rim damage.

A good floor pump will make it not so much of a chore to ensure your tires are always properly topped up.

If you plan on leaving your bike anywhere except your garage, then a good bike lock is also quite essential.

If you have those things, then I would probably opt for replacing the stock tires.

Often the stock tires on bikes aren't great, and you would be able to get a pretty good set of tires for that amount of money.

Could easily save you from lots of frustration down the road.

(I don`t have a definitive answer) .

I would concentrate on what is most frustrating when it fails when riding a bike: Tire and wheels maintenance:

Tire levers.

Good air pump.

Good tube patch kit.

Replacement tubes and tires.

A set of hex wrenches (check Imperial vs. Metric) After that, you can add whatever you feel will help you maintain your bike (specific wrenches, lubrication and grease,...)

Insipired by: http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/article/home-wrench-building-a-cycling-tool-kit-from-scratch-43564/ http://www.bicycling.com/maintenance/bicycle-tools/16-essential-bike-tools

If you already have the usual tools and clothing you can always need more of the typical wear parts: Tires, tubes, chains, brake pads, chain oil, cables, pants …

Otherwise I’d start with a proper stand pump, mini pump (for on the bike), tubes, chain tool, hex keys, lock, bottles, helmet … Clothing is of course essential but hard to guess the right size for ordering.

If it's a quality bike, it will attract professional bike (part) thieves – which are everywhere, like bacteria – and you should invest in a quality U-lock and a set of good anti-theft skewers for the wheels and seat post.

Depends on the type of tour you are doing.

My 20 mile work commute requires panniers, cold and wet weather gear for the winter, lights for early morning and late evenings along with the common small items: 1.

Two spare tubes2.

Patch kit3.

Bike-specific multi-tool4.

Frame-fit pump5.

Emergency identification6.

Water bottle with water Regular ID, insurance info, cash, phone, clothing, keys, safety equipment, bike lock, shoes to fit my clipless pedals, and other items taken for granted are assumed to be on the list.

Ziplock bags for anything that can't get wet may also be added to the list.

I choose to use a GPS enabled cycling computer for courses and routing.

On my tour from Maine to Florida, I carried significantly more.

For closer to home touring, one can go a long way with little more than a patch kit and a pump.

Question: Context:My bike shop includes free servicing as a standard with a new bike. I don't need such thing and live too far away. In lieu of waiver I can get €100 of stuff from the shop.  Best bike problem ever: I need to decide what to get for free form the bike shop...  Can anyone advise on what they would consider to be absolute essentials as a road/touring cyclist?

What are the absolute essentials a cyclist should own?

The absolute essentials a cyclist should own: seatbag, spare tube, mini-pump, tire patch kit, good floor pump, tire levers, replacement tubes and tires, chain tool, hex keys, helmet, bottles, lock, front and rear lights, brake pads, chain oil, clothing, ziplock bag, GPS and U-lock.

A good floor pump and a repair kit with tools, lubricant and spares is a basic requirement for maintaining your bike. A helmet and front and rear lights are important for safety, while theft protection is essential if you plan to leave your bike outside the house at all. Stock tyres can be replaced  if necessary. Appropriate clothing (including cycle shoes if applicable) is also important. Emergency identification and a cycle computer are also useful, but the list depends on your intended use of the bike.


OpenStreetMap

(a collaborative project to create a free editable map of the world ) has a very up to date and accurate cycle route layer available.

I have used it before in Europe to plan large trips.

There are also lots of online add-on services that allow you to use the cycling OpenStreetMap to plan cycling routes and run them either on smart phones or on GPS cycling computers.

Garmin has even used the service to create the specialized maps on their Edge GPS cycling computers.

Some example services include: BikeRouteToaster Garmin Connect ...

more to come (or add them in the comments) As a side note, other proprietary services such as Google maps also have good (and constantly improving) cycling maps.

I however personally find OpenStreetMap is a little more up-to-date and accurate, likely due to the fact anyone can submit a fixes and new pathways.

Google Maps has a Bicycling overlay that can help you.

It does have a few indication that states what type of road you have : Trails

Bicycle-friendly roads

Dedicated lanes

Dirt/unpaved trails

So you might check those dedicated lanes.

An other option would be to use Strava's Global Heatmap where you can see where people are cycling the most.

You can't really see what you want exactly (dedicated lanes), but coupled with Google's map, I find it's a good start to plan a ride.

A lot of roads in Germany and Austria are bicycle only.

Usually these are less frequented roads, turned into bike tours.

Then there is a very nice road from Lienz in Austria, to Italy.

http://bicyclegermany.com/ http://hikebikemap.org/ http://www.fahr-radwege.com/ (Austria)

http://www.eurovelo.org/ http://www.suedtirolerland.it/de/rad-mountainbike/fahrradwege-in-suedtirol/

There is one site that might help you with bike (and other) paths is GPSies (Tracks for Vagabonds) which has a loot of nice features such as: web & mobile site available in 24 languages, metric/imperial system discover routes (supposedly 3,5 mil tracks) (by foot, by wheel, with animals, by motorcycle, on water, in winter...), browse/search recommended routes near your location for different activities (hiking, walking, cycling, mountain biking...), option to create, upload or edit your tracks and it works with following maps: Open Street Maps, Open Cycle Map, Sigma Cycle, Sigma Topo, Hike Bike Map, Google Maps, ESRI)

last but not least are mobile apps for Android and Iphone.

(I couldn't test them because I'm unfortunately on WP :D)

One thing I like is their route creator that seems easier to use than (for example drawing and exporting tracks) on Google Earth.

Check out http://trailforks.com/ which is a pinkbike trail platform.

A huge database where people all around the world share their local trails, with short description, photos, videos and exact location and length through google maps.

I live in Greece and it has helped me find some nice trails close to me.

For the Netherlands you might use https://www.route.nl/routeplanner

There (the Netherlands) you can benefit from an extensive bicycle paths network that are marked by signposts thorough the country.

One simply plans a route between two points and marks the knoppunten (knots) numbers along the way.

Then simply follow the signs.

At each knot you find a map with the surrounding, some other routes (with distances between the knots) should you plan to follow a different route.

All routes are bicycle-friendly.

Vast majority is a separate bicycle path.

Sometimes it is a marked bicycle lane.

One might also try the LF-routes ( Landelijke Fietsroutes - country-wide bicycle routes) from https://www.hollandcyclingroutes.com/long-distance-cycle-routes

Question: Does anyone know of a website that has a map of bicycle paths in Europe that are bike/walkers only, i.e. no cars?

Website with bicycle only paths in Europe?

OpenStreetMap: There are also lots of online add-on services that allow you to use the cycling OpenStreetMap to plan cycling routes and run them either on smart phones or on GPS cycling computers. As a side note, other proprietary services such as Google maps also have good (and constantly improving) cycling maps. A lot of roads in Germany and Austria are bicycle only. GPSies  (Tracks for Vagabonds) which has a loot of nice features. For the Netherlands you might use  https://www.route.nl/routeplanner. An other option would be to use  Strava's Global Heatmap  where you can see where people are cycling the most.

OpenStreetMap, Google Maps and other sites have cycle-specific maps and are often constantly updated and improved. Some European countries have extensive cycling networks with some roads open to bicycles only. These can be explored with dedicated online or offline maps, and are often signposted. Strava's Global Heatmap shows common routes in your area, and other sites like GPSies allow you to create and edit routes or view routes recommended by others.


As others have mentioned one reason is to make it easier to installed slime/sealant into a tube or tire.

Typically you'll take the valve off, and use an injector to put the slime into the tire.

For tubeless tire setups, removing the valve core allows a higher volume of air to quickly get into the tire when you are first blowing it onto the rim.

Some types of valve extenders used by people with deep profile rims thread into the valve core threads.

Another reason to have removable Presta valves is they tend to be somewhat fragile so being able to replace a busted valve vs. having to replace the whole tube could potentially save a little bit of money (or allot of money if we are talking about breaking the valve core on a $150 tubular tire.)

The valve cores should be consistent from maker to maker.

I think the big benefit of a removable core is that it makes it possible to add "self-patching slime" to the tube.

With a core in place the slime would likely foul the valve and make it inoperable.

Otherwise, I think the removability is more an artifact of the manufacturing process – and as you've noted, not necessarily a feature.

Serviceable: Can get clogged with debris and can go bad Install Slime

I pull the core and save it when I throw away flats.

On a new tube tighten it down before you install and if it does come loose

I use just a tiny drop of Loctite.

You can carry a patch kit, but if you break the central pin while working on the tube it is of no use.

Procure a couple from wasted tubes and carry them in the instrument pack and you won't have to come back from deep wilderness on foot.

The accepted answer briefly mentions deep carbon wheels.

I will elaborate.

50-60mm deep wheel are common in many road races, and triathletes and time trialists will go as deep as they can, probably all the way up to 90mm front and a full disc wheel rear.

I believe many valve stems for performance road tubes are around 48mm in total length.

This won't offer enough valve on even a 40mm deep wheel.

Tubes with longer stems are available, e.g. Vittoria makes a 60mm valve stem.

However, even this isn't enough for the deepest wheels, and manufacturers would have to maintain more SKUs (stock keeping units, i.e. different models) of their high end road tubes.

Valve extenders are a solution.

Two versions exist : one where you just open the presta valve, screw the extender on, and leave it, and another where you remove the core, insert it into the extender, and then screw the extender on the original presta valve.

Having a valve extender can also simplify your spare parts logistics.

Many riders may train on one set of wheels, and race or do harder rides on deeper race wheels.

Those who do this would either need to carry a spare tube with a valve suited to their deepest wheel, or just carry a valve extender of suitable length.

Question: Once again, I spent some quality time debugging a slow leak and found out it was a loose valve core. I tightened it with pliers, but it raises the question, is there a situation where it is useful to be able to remove the valve core? Also, have replacement valve cores been available at some point, and do the cores have a standard thread or is it manufacturer-specific?

What are the benefits of removable presta valve cores?

For tubeless tire setups, removing the valve core allows a higher volume of air to quickly get into the tire when you are first blowing it onto the rim.  One big benefit of a removable core is that it makes it possible to add "self-patching slime" to the tube. Another reason to have removable Presta valves is they tend to be somewhat fragile so being able to replace a busted valve vs. having to replace the whole tube could potentially save a little bit of money (or allot of money if we are talking about breaking the valve core on a $150 tubular tire.)

Valve cores can be removed when filling the tube with slime or extending the valve for deep profile rims. They can also be removed for cleaning or replacement if they are damaged. This design can also be due to the manufacturing process rather than for the benefit of the rider.

Valve cores can be removed when filling the tube with slime or extending the valve for deep profile rims. They can also be removed for cleaning.

Presta valve cores can be fragile, so this allows easy replacement if they get bent.

This can also be due to the manufacturing process rather than for the benefit of the rider.


I think there are two questions here: 1

- Can you have a bike professionally assembled by a bike shop?

In my experience (having done this a couple of times) it will typically cost the price of their "pro tune" or equivalent - the service when they break the bike down and put it back together.

$2-300 say.

Bike shops can be a bit sniffy about this, but getting to know your local tech staff will help make things easier.

- Is this a good idea?

Depends why you're doing it.

If you've got a frame or components you want to put together - say you bought a particular rare steel frame that you want your gruppo from your other bike on...

then it can be a great option.

If it's about buying a high-end bike for cheaper - it may be a good option but check where you're sourcing from.

If it's about buying a cheaper (say sub $500) bike for less than you can pay in an LBS - I'd say a crazy false economy.

Instead, buy a second hand bike on CL or similar and save $100 or so to get it checked out by your LBS.

Slightly aligned to the point above - if I'm a bike mech, being asked to work on a cool steel frame or a high-end bike from a brand I may never have worked on is pretty cool.

Being asked to spanner a cheap bike from Walmart is going to make me feel pretty crappy about myself and question why I work in the industry.

The level of work I do is likely to be commensurate with how the work makes me feel...

In my experience, bike shops don't make much money off of turning wrenches.

It then follows that they don't typically care for some bike that you chose to buy online instead of from their showroom, which is where most of their money is made.

If you buy something that doesn't align well with a particular shop, i.e. an overly cheap bike and a shop that deals a lot with higher-end stuff, they might not want to associate themselves with such an inferior product.

Cheap shifters and derailleurs, for example, can be impossible to dial in.

One can not expect even a seasoned mechanic to be responsible for cheap metals that bend under pressure as their eventual imperfect performance could then be associated with his work or his shop.

As a second example, cheaper rims can be a nightmare to true; as is expecting them to remain so.

The time that it takes to work with a cheap bike is not worth the shop's time.

All of this being said, however, just go into the bike shop and explain your situation to them.

If you're ordering something that they think is worth their time, then expect to pay at least $100 to $125 for them to properly assemble it and tune it.

They might even be able to show you something there in the shop that is comparable to what you're interested in!

My local bike shop has a posted price of $80 to assemble a bike as received in a box (presumably bought over the internet) and $200 to assemble a bike from a frame and set of components.

One of my friends bought a frame and groupset (quite a nice one) and they were happy to do the work.

You should talk to the specific shop you are thinking of and see what they say.

The same shop has free lifetime adjustments on any bike you buy from them, so you need to figure that into your calculation of the economics.

Yes many bicycle repair shops offer assembly service.

Of course they would also like a shot at your business for the bike.

You will generally get more free service from a shop where you purchased the bike, so there is some value to that.

I just called a couple of local shops about assembly, one was very straightforward and easy to talk with and gave a simple price.

One was like these guys above, a lot of double talk nonsense.

I'm going with the straightforward.

Assembly is pretty simple.

The answer should be too.

There are many good online bike sellers and the box

arrives needing assembly.

I called a shop near me as i am in the same situation with public transport.

Perhaps you could call your local shops and ask if you could have it delivered to them for assembly.

Best wishes fellow foot, bike and pub trans commuter.

Question: I live in Orlando, Florida, and I am stuck with no transportation besides public buses, taxis, etc. as my bike literally fell apart in pieces in the middle of a road. I am looking to purchase a new bike, but I would need for it to be professionally assembled. My question is would most bike shops work something out where I could ship it directly to them for assembly, so that I do not have to walk with a bike box for a few miles.

Do Bike stores allow you to ship a bike to them to assemble?

Some bike shops are happy to assemble bikes bought online. However, bike shops make most of their money from selling bikes, not working on them, hence they are unlikely to be interested in putting together a bike that has been bought online, especially if it is a cheap one. If the bike shop usually sells higher end bikes, its mechanics may well not want to be associated with work on cheaper models. It is best to contact the shop in question, they may even have something better to offer you.

Bike shops have different policies about setting up outside bikes, and may be reluctant to work on inferior quality bikes or support cheaper online purchases. However, some are happy to assemble outside bikes for a higher price than for their own. It is worth asking the shop itself, which might be able to offer a comparable bike that they can set up cheaper or for free.


Unethical, because you're imposing costs on the organisers anyway.

Apart from the obvious "if you get hurt they're going to help you", they almost always face costs per participant and often have a limit on numbers.

Violate those limits and the organisers will have problems.

You're also causing wear and tear on the track, equipment and marshals.

You can't pretend that away by saying "other people do it too"...

yes, and they paid for the privilege.

You're stealing it.

Not really ethical IMO.

This is another case where your exact marginal impact is low, but at some point one more increment like that will get the race cancelled or refused permission to do it again.

The other thing is that if you are involved in an incident and are deemed to be at fault, you will not be insured.

The race insurance won't cover you (obviously), but whatever insurance you have almost certainly has a an illegal activity exclusion.

They'd most likely leave it to you to show that what you were doing was lawful.

But since most races take place on temporarily closed areas, that would be hard.

They close the area specifically to people like you.

For exactly that reason.

I’d say it’s totally

okay if the road is not closed for the event and still open for cars and other vehicles.

If it's a race with competitors who are trying to win, then I would definitely say no.

Like time travel, just being there at the same place and time can cause unknown effects on future outcome.

If you want to use the track, contact the race organizers and see if they want people to help out checking the track the morning or night before the race for unplanned obstacles or other problems with the route.

See if they need referees (not sure if this is the correct term in cycling) to follow the riders to make sure everybody is following the track and not taking short cuts.

Do you have any first aid certifications?

Maybe they need on-the-trail first-aid care for riders who get injured.

If it's a route without laps, they may even allow people to ride a safe distance (half hour or more) behind the actual competitors.

If it's a charity or other type of non-competitive road ride, and the roads are open to cars, then you technically have every right to be there, and although some may frown at it, there isn't really much of a reason not to go, provided you are a courteous rider and don't use any of the facilities furnished to riders.

I think that any kind of closed course, even on the road, and even for a non-competitive rides is probably off limits.

And "closed course" doesn't mean that the entire thing is behind a barbed wire fence.

It would be impractical for them to block off every entrance to a course.

A closed course is any course where they have made some effort to try and stop unregistered riders, vehicles, and pedestrians from being on the route.

Yes, that's highly unethical.

This isn't any different than banditing a marathon.

Race organizers go through quite a bit of trouble and expense to provide a safe racing environment, especially if the race goes over public roads.

By jumping into a race you're exposing race organizers, participants and yourself for liability and in some situations stealing "resources."

I contemplated the topic, visited a local XC/Enduro* race, asked the guys that organise it.

"Are riders without subscription and numbers hindering the race, they are not one or two but about 20%?

"No.

Why would they?"

My conclusion is that any cyclist without registration is no different than any other bystander .

Consequently, if the race organisers have taken strain to restrict outside personnel

**, then Mσᶎ's answer applies with full strength.

On the other hand, if travel is allowed, cycling is no more immoral than walking on the race course.

However: taking food or water constitutes theft, just as if a random hiker helped himself (optional) as unnumbered riders are not in a hurry for anywhere, they must help any racer in need.

as Criggie explains not subscribing for insurance and for the race does not help the race to be held the next year or the medical crews to be funded.

Those are supposed to be objective arguments, on the basis of which each individual can decide.

* - 100m positive attitude gain, 1700m negative attitude gain, mix of loose gravel road and singletrack of moist sharp stones; hikers, children, dogs, automobiles everywhere

** - for example, I would consider a large warning sign a suitable restriction for hikers, or a police car a suitable restriction to automobiles

Would you ride that exact route on another day, when there was no race on?

I'd say stop being frugal and support cycling in your area.

Question: I find it tedious to spend half a day riding the dangerous streets of the city to purchase a mountain insurance, then spend money on race subscription and in then arriving early as hell on the start line to get my number.   Provided I do not take any water or food from the checkpoints and I do not cross the finish line, is there an ethical reason not to ride with the race?

Is it ethical to ride with races without being part of them?

Generally, it is considered unethical to ride with a race if you haven't registered as a competitor. Firstly, you have not contributed to the cost of the event. Second, you may cause an accident and not be covered by the race insurance. If you want to use the track and do not want to register for the race, contact the organizers and see if they need people to help out at the event. However, if it is an open road or charity event, you have the right to be there as does the public in general.

Especially on a closed course, an unregistered rider is taking the services of the organisers without paying the set price. This may also increase participant numbers beyond the permitted number and may affect insurance coverage, and may affect the outcome of the race for paying participants. Taking food, water and resources from the organisers constitutes theft and makes the event less profitable and likely to be repeated. You should support local cycling events. Organisers are not able to stop you from cycling on and event with open roads, but if you are unable to pay then it would be best to stay out of the way or offer to help at the event in exchange for participation.


All the elite riders I have encountered just know .

I think its part of the attention to detail necessary at that level.

You almost never see them looking down to check (that would be showing a weakness and giving oponents an opportunity).

But if you mean can the rider say which cog they are using at the front and rear?

then the answer is that often we can't say.

Usually we know by memory which front cog we are using.

And as I change the rear gear, I know by the different feel of the ratio whether I'm near the top, the middle, or the bottom of the cluster.

I very rarely try to change gears past the last one.

The bike knows.

That's enough.

Cadence mostly.

The answer to your question is in the title.

Experience.

Same way motocross riders know what gear they are in.

The speed of the engine vs how fast they are moving.

One of my bikes has no indicators and I'm less familiar with it than my other bike which has indicators and more years especially at the top.

But I don't find it to be a problem.

You don't need to know exactly which gear you're in, just enough to know (e.g)

that if you want to drop a gear you need to drop a chainring.

A combination of feel and a vague recollection of what I've done is normally enough for that.

I consider myself decently experienced, having ridden for many years, and my answer is that I don't have to know.

The numbers aren't important to me; it's all in how it feels.

Whatever speed I'm going, if I want to go faster

and I'm pedaling without feeling like I'm doing any work, I need to shift into a higher gear.

If I feel like I'm expending too much energy (i.e. it's too hard to pedal), then I gear down.

There's not a "right" gear to be in; it's relative to my current speed and how much work I feel like doing, or, in some cases, how much torque I need.

For me noise is a good indicator of “bad” gears with cross chaining.

I also know from the speed when I have to change chainrings.

A lot of the time I don't…

Most of my riding is on an older touring bike with downtube shifters or a tandem with mountain bike type (the two button/lever kind) shifters.

So I know generally what gear the bike is in by effort and

like Michael says detect cross-chaining by sound.

With the touring bike shifter position tells me a lot about what gear I'm in

and I can read it by feel.

On the tandem I can tell the extremes by the shifter behavior (it either won't let you pull cable or won't release anymore).

I also have a pretty relaxed attitude towards cross-chaining.

I know it is "bad" and try to avoid it, but I also don't worry too much about occasionally picking the "wrong" gear combinations.

I usually notice them due to noise or feel and when I do I shift if I can.

If I can't a put a bit of money into the bike parts jar when I get home.

With todays 2- and 1-chainring cranksets, chain-crossing isn't a problem and with the cranksets where it may be a problem (which are rather rare in high-end groups)

the sound and feel are good signs of it.

So you don't really need to know which gear you're in.

And when you spend a lot of time on your bike you just start to recognise the gears by feel and are able to tell which one you're in...

well, +/-1 let's say.

I switched from Shimano Deore (with displays) to Sram X9 (without displays)

some 5 years ago, and never felt the need to look down and check the gears.

So they are not this important, just a matter of changing habbits.

Experienced riders pick the right chainring based on the terrain coming up.

Then all they need to know is to go up or down on the cassette as needed.

If you've topped or bottomed-out then that section is over, time to pick a new chainring.

Use bar end shifters; you do not have to look at the paddles to feel the gear position with your hands.

The angle difference between index points is distinct enough, even when indexing ten gears, that you can just touch the paddle and know what gear you're in.

It's all cadence related.

No need to be a pro for that...

Question: Most mid to high level mountain groupsets (eg SLX and X7) have shifter options without any display as to what gear is currently active. How do riders avoid cross-chaining and other unpleasantnesses, especially when riding in the dark or on rough terrain (i.e. when they can't readily take a look at the rear cogs)?

How do experienced cyclists know which gear they are in without an optical display?

Most experienced riders do not necessarily know which gear they are in as far as numbers are concerned. They can tell the right or wrong gear from the feel and also the noise.  From the feel of the bike, they know they need to change up or down.

Experienced riders learn to know when to change gears based on cadence, torque and other factors and have an idea of the approximate rear gear, but do not need to know the exact gear they're using at the time. The problem of cross chaining is less serious with modern gears, and in most cases riders can simply choose their gear based on effort.


Take the lights and anything else thats likely to be stolen off your bike.

For things that can't be removed easily, you may want to use something like Pitlock security skewers (or security bolts) or glue in ball bearings or similar into the head of the bolts (which will make them hard to remove when you need to remove them, but a casual thief can't remove them easily).

Also, make sure you know how to properly lock up your bike (which has been discussed at length in other places on this SE).

In terms of accessories like lights, GPS, etc.

the only way to be safe is to remove them entirely.

Remember that if something is quick-releasable for you, it's also quick-releasable for thieves.

Bike lights will frequently get stolen even if they aren't easily removable, because they're valuable.

There is an assortment of "anti-theft" bike accessories available, but most of them just rely on obscure screws, and they tend to be inferior products as they must make other compromises in order to be harder to steal while also being priced competitively.

For bike components you may also want to remove as many quick release levers as possible.

I've had a seat + seatpost stolen before, and know many people whose wheels have been stolen.

You can lock your bike in such a way to prevent wheel theft, but it's impractical to lock things like seats, so you have to make it as difficult as possible.

Fortified Bike sells bike lights that are designed to be theft resistant.

They're made of heavy aluminum and use security screws so most thieves won't have the proper tool to unscrew it.

The also sell a security seatpost clamp to help keep thieves from stealing the light by stealing your seat.

I haven't used their newer rechargeable lights, but I've had their older Defender Stealth model on my bike for about 3 years now and haven't had it stolen despite keeping my bike locked up outside at work.

I've attached lights etc.

with anti-tamper torx screws and normal screws in awkward places (like under the rear rack).

Both have some deterrent value over normal screws in easy-to-reach places, which in turn are better than clips that need no tools at all.

Some modifications may be required to replace the thumbscrew with something more secure.

But I had half a front light stolen because the rest was well screwed on

- they opened it as you would for changing the batteries.

Most lights are designed to be easy to take off, which might as well mean hard to secure.

For anything other than cheap rubbish lights you should reckon that they'll be stolen or destroyed in the attempt whatever you do.

You should probably make the same assumption even for cheap rubbish if you reply on them, or at least have a backup (in my case a cheap rear light on my pannier - which comes with me - and a headtorch on my helmet).

The only way to do this would be lights that are integrated into your frame so they can't be removed.

Not a cheap option.

Instead, leave your lights and tools, etc in a bag that can be removed from the bike with one motion, or in a backpack, so you have them but only fit the lights to the bike when you need them.

I don't generally leave the helmet at the bike either...

I've had one stomped to pieces while I was elsewhere

[With lights that attach via a quick release system,] clip the quick release thumb lever off with wire cutters, you can still remove them with a flat screwdriver.

It's only good for stopping the opportunistic thief.

I wrote a post listing out some locking lights and other alternatives to detachable lights on my website: Bike to Everything - Locking Lights .

Here is some of the info rewritten specifically to answer this question.

You have a few options to prevent theft of your bike lights: Locking lights that use tamper proof screws on them (example:

Fortified lights mentioned in another answer.)

Anti-theft lights that are extremely inconvenient to remove and use non-standard hex sizes (example: Bell Radian 650 anti-theft lights) Concealed Lights.

If you attach your light on a seat stay or underneath your rear rack for example, it may be less obvious to a thief that there's a light there.

Get your own tamper proof screws and attach your (non-detachable)

lights that way.

(As Chris H mentioned) Bike saddles can sometimes come with integrated lights (easier to find for a cruiser style seat), and bike saddles can be locked down .

Helmet lights can come with you if you take your helmet in with you.

There are now helmets with integrated lights (example: Lumos), you can get a light that attaches to the helmet, or you could even get a normal headlight that you put on your helmet.

You can attach lights to your bag or pannier that you take with you, so you don't have to think about removing the lights.

I love using both my Fortified lights and the Bell Radian 650 lights, and

honestly I hope more companies start coming out with some better anti-theft lights so you can lock your bike with only a U-lock !

Question: I was wondering what one could do to keep his bike attachments from being stolen. On Monday two lights were stolen off of my bike. I only had them for a day. It was the kind that has a rubber "strap" of sorts that goes on the handlebar. I only really care/want to know because they were fairly expensive...

Protecting bike attachments such as lights against theft

All items that can be easily removed should be taken off the bike when it is left. Moreover, your bike should be properly locked up. Anti-theft lights are available as are locks for seats. For items that are difficult to remove, there are various anti-theft devices on the market, such as security skewers, however, some doubt is cast on their efficiency.

Lights and anything easy to be removed should be taken with you or secured to the bike. Quick release seat clamps can be replaced with security clamps, and lights can be attached to the helmet or panniers and taken with you. Theft-resistant bike lights and other systems may not be very effective or high quality, but are available. Lights integrated into the frame are expensive, but helmets and saddles have cheaper integrated lights. As a quick way to slow thieves down, cut off any quick release levers so they can only be removed with tools.


It is (strongly) not advisable to put a rack on carbon.

You could probably put a lock mount on the handlebar stem (I do).

You could get an over-sized seat bag.

Possibly a handlebar bag.

Bottle cage bag

but they don't have much capacity.

They are good for like wallet, cell phone, and keys.

Don't like to do product recommendations but Revelatedesigns

have a lot of bags.

Not easy to find

but there are carbon forks with rack eyelets .

But I would not do that to that bike.

Not a typical commuter bike.

I suggest looking at frame bags.

They don't carry much, but they have more capacity than the more sensible under-seat bags.

You can get various sizes (up to 'fill the triangle'), and could even do both a frame bag and a seat bag.

There's a cycle tourist with a carbon bike a bit heavier than yours here so it can be done.

Most of the carbon bike people tape their frames where the bag will rub to prevent the bag slowly grinding through the frame, but that seems to be the main concern.

I have a rack on Carbon Fiber Trek 5000 series frame.

It's been there for around 7 years.

I did it by drilling and tapping holes into the rear dropouts, which are aluminum.

So none of the weight is on the frame at all — it's taken by the wheel directly.

A single stay at the top anchors the rack to the brake bolt.

Now, I would not think of using the bike for a loaded tour.

But for holding my briefcase on for a trip to the office: no problem at all.

Of course, many newer carbon frames don't have a flat place on the dropout where you could do this.

A better alternative might be a racks that mounts to the axle, attached by the QR skewer.

Yes, you can put a rack on a CF frame, given the right rack.

Namely, Tailfin makes racks explicitly designed to work with CF frames without rack eyelets, like "racing" road bikes.

You could get a beam rack that attaches to a seat post.

Only issue is that you'll be limited by weight you can carry.

Then stress is transferred off the brittle frame.

Toured like this on a carbon frame.

Just be prepared for fun and games when changing an inner tube.

Question: I got a carbon-framed  Kestrel Talon Road Bike  recently but I also want to use it for commuting to and from work and I want a place to put my lock and other stuff on the bike. Is it possible to have a rack on this kinda bike.

Can I put a rack on a carbon road bike?

Although some people disagree, most cyclists think it is OK to put a rack on a carbon bike. In fact, Tailfin makes racks explicitly designed for carbon frames. Frame bags and oversized seat bags would be an alternative to a rack.

This is generally not recommended, although options (e.g. mounted to the seat post) are available. A rack mounted to the handlebars or a frame bag are safer options, although the frame should be protected from friction from straps.


Yes - numbness denotes a problem with bike fit or a thermal problem.

Here's my personal experience.

Fingers - riding a MTB with "ergonomic" grips, the sort with a wee wing that rests under your palm.

With these I get numb fourth and fifth fingers on both hands.

It takes a three hour ride to start, and if I go 4+ hours then the numbness can last into the evening.

Feet/toes - I have road shoes that are perhaps too small.

If I wear thick socks by mistake, I can lose feeling in toes, again after a long ride.

Answer there is better-fitting shoes, but the interim fix is thin socks.

Neck - More sore than numb, but a generic helmet often has a brim or visor.

This is fine for a MTB but makes you lift your face more on a road bike, leading to a sore neck.

Unclipping the visor is a cheap and easy alievement.

Backside - an upright posture puts more weight on your saddle, via your bum.

A good saddle holds the sit-bones, and not the softer tissues.

A poor saddle presses the wrong things and makes a ride uncomfortable, and numb.

The fix is a saddle replacement, or temporarily spend more time on your feet/pedals and be less efficient but less sore.

`nads - this one is related to repeated friction inducing chafing more than numbness.

A ride under 20 km doesn't need special clothes generally.

Longer rides you'll appreciate padded pants.

A bad fit will leave somewhere scraping back and forth every pedal revolution.

Personal Story -

A flat singletrack MTB course with minor ups and downs, made my padded pants drop a little so the pad's seam was rubbing on the top of the thigh.

I wore a blister that popped.

Since it was around the corner I couldn't see how bad it was, but the hot shower made it quite obvious.

The fix?

tighter pants and pull them up.

No underwear underneath, and last resort is to apply some kind of friction-reducing cream.

Cold - if you're cold you're going to go numb.

Earlobes, nose, cheeks, fingers/toes, and limbs.

I also notice a cold stomach when I stop.

This is exacerbated by the wet.

Personal story

- I once rode through a deep unexpected puddle of snow-melt and got wet up to mid-calf.

My shoes were light "hard drive bag" open-weave.

And then I had to ride ~20km home through a cold easterly wind.

When I got off the bike, I could not feel one foot at all.

The numb sensation did not go away with a hot shower - it took a full 24 hours to vanish completely.

Thermal generally - be prepared to pull up or roll down your sleeves, unzip your top while riding.

If you have an uphill ahead, drink 2 minutes before the start and open all the vents.

If you have a fast downhill coming, button things so you don't get chilled on the way down while coasting.

Rain - if its predicted to rain, consider not riding, or take the wet-weather bike with mudguards/fenders and treadded tyres instead of the slick roadbike.

Take

/Wear a waterproof outer layer and put it on if it does start to drizzle.

I've never been a runner so I can't really comment on similarities, but certainly it is possible to experience numbness while riding.

I have poor circulation anyway, and for me it usually happens on long rides in low temperatures.

Warm weather rides are fine.

Also note that there are various medical conditions (e.g. diabetes) which can give rise to poor circulation, so someone who for example is diabetic may be predisposed to numbness.

Not generally.

Cyclists have points of contact - hands, feet, butt - where prolonged pressure is created.

Pressure can cut off communication between nerves and the brain, making a body part or area feel numb.

Something could happen with other areas, like the neck for example, if blood flow is impinged and the nerves don't receive oxygen.

This is why wiggling things helps, keeps blood flowing and nerves firing.

The only numbness I have ever experienced on long rides (6+ hours) was due to poor fit or equipment failure.

The endurance cyclists I known have never described anything "going numb" as a regular occurrence with distance riding.

I can tell you that at the end of a very long ride (12+ hours)

I am generally starting to get sore.

I have not great knees, and the tendons and ligaments in them tend to become inflamed after more than 12 hours or so of riding.

They hurt, I wish more than anything that they went numb.

There tends to be an odd phenomenon where after many hours on a bike doing anything except sitting or laying down

I find horrible.

Walking and or moving is just uncomfortable, it's preferable to ride more, or not move at all.

Coming from the perspective of a cyclist commuter who also does cycle touring, but sometimes doesn't cycle for months: Parts of your body can go numb, yes, but it's less about how fit you are, and more about how much practise you have had.

For example if you haven't cycled regularly then an hour or two in the saddle can leave you with a numb feeling in your backside where it rests on the saddle.

But if you keep doing regular rides then this will decrease and disappear.

Numbness can also occur in the hands and arms, but tends to be over longer periods of time (more than 2 hours).

As you were asking people who don't bicycle, their lack of practise will result in numb backsides if they don't cycle regularly.

A big factor is also the equipment you use.

For example buy a saddle with a groove down the centre which will prevent your soft parts from becoming numb, buy handlebar grips with flat pads at the end to rest your hands on, because the best place to place pressure on your palm is the outside edge (see Tip#4 http://www.builtlean.com/2011/02/23/how-to-proper-push-up-form/ ).

In my experience having a saddle with a groove and handlebar grips with flat pads makes a huge difference on long rides.

Example saddles: google bike saddle with groove Example handlebar grips: http://www.downtheroad.org/Equipment/Bike_Parts/Bike_handlebars.htm

Question: When talking to people who don't bicycle themselves, I've noticed that every time I mention bicycling long distances, people seem to think that your body goes numb, like it does when you run long distances. Does it? Is it in any way related to how fit the individual is?

Do riders bodies go numb after hours of riding?

Cyclists generally concur that numbness results from bike fit problems, circulation issues, cold weather or being unused to spending long periods of time in the saddle. In addition, medical conditions, such as diabetes, may cause riders to feel numb.  Most obviously a poor saddle will make your butt numb. A saddle with a groove and handlebar grips with flat pads makes a huge difference on long rides. Suitable clothing for the cold weather and rain will stop numbness.

Numbness often indicates pressure cutting off blood flow, which can be solved with a better fitting saddle and other bike parts, more padding and properly fitting clothing and shoes. Low circulation can also be caused by medical conditions including diabetes. Low temperatures can also cause or exacerbate numbness, which can be addressed with suitable clothing or limiting riding to warmer temperatures. Riders may experience numbness if they are not used to cycling regularly, but this will improve with practise.


You want to remove the wheels, seat post (you may be able to get away with setting this all the way at the bottom or doing nothing depending on how you're storing it), handlebars and pedals.

If you can go to your local bike shop and get a (cardboard) box for shipping bikes, the bike should pack in nicely for storage.

This video shows you the steps in a nice way visually.

You're not shipping it, so you don't need as much bubble wrap and straps and foam, but bubble wrap is nice.

The tools you'll need are likely a set of metric hex keys (mostly 5 mm, possibly 4-8 mm) and a thin adjustable wrench (maybe a pedal wrench too).

To remove the wheels, you likely have quick release wheels, so just pop the lever and unwind it.

Undo the brake's quick release and

the wheel will come out.

Be careful not to let the derailleur get impacted as that can make it come out of adjustment (e.g. don't drop the bike when you have the wheels removed).

The seat post will be either a hex key or quick release.

If its a hex key, try the appropriate size hex key (4-8 mm).

If its a quick release, pop the lever and unwind it.

If you're not using a bike box, I'd stuff the seatpost with a bit of newspaper or something in case critters make a home there.

The seatpost is also likely to be greased, so wipe it clean.

The handlebars should be removed and put to the side of the bike.

I wouldn't disconnect any cables.

(from http://brimages.bikeboardmedia.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/moots-rsl-road-bike-review-stem02.jpg ) Simply remove the bolts on the front of the stem (the four bolts on the front of the red piece, in this picture), put the handlebars to the side of the bike and re- attach the red piece (so you don't lose it).

You may want to tape them to the bike to prevent them from moving.

For the pedals, you'll either want a thin adjustable wrench which can adjust to about 15 mm or a pedal wrench of the appropriate size (a combo 15 mm + 9/16" will be fine).

Note the left hand side pedal (when you're riding the bike) is counter threaded -- that is, it tightens counter clockwise, rather than clockwise.

The right hand side pedal tightens clockwise.

Remove the pedals.

Wipe the pedal threads and crankset eye clean.

This should all fit nicely into a bike box which would be ideal for storage.

Gloves may be nice for preventing your hand from getting messy.

To re assemble the bike, do this in reverse, making sure to grease your bolts + pedals + seatpost appropriately.

You will want: hex/allen key set (check standard vs. metric)

pedal

wrench ratchet set or box wrenches (crescent wrench as last alternative) gardening gloves to keep your hands clean

Ensure that you do not strip the fasteners as metric/standard can be a very close fit sometimes.

Save some old t-shirts or towels to wrap around the drive-train to keep it from dirtying your space.

When taking off your left pedal, ensure the chain is on the largest chain-ring to save your knuckles in case your wrench slips while loosening the pedal.

Set of Allen (hex) key:

usually 4,5 and 6 mm would do the job.

You can use these Allen key for disassembling handlebar, stem, seatpost, and most pedals Adjustable wrench or (usually) 15 mm wrench: (check if needed) in order to remove the pedal.

You could usually remove the pedal with 8 mm Allen key (sometimes could be 5 mm, 6 mm, or 10 mm).

Check if there is a hexagonal recess in the pedal axle (crank side), and better, check the size so that you could buy a correct Allen key.

The size would be the distance between two opposite (parallel) flat sides of the hexagonal recess.

If it is too much trouble, just buy a set of Allen key from 3-12 mm.

It won't cost much.

You could remove the wheel simply by hand (check if the wheel is clamped by skewer).

I take a single multitool when I travel to disassemble/reassemble my bike.

I have an older model crank brothers tool that they don't make anymore, but something similar is available here .

I run pedals that can be taken on and off with a 8mm hex, so I don't need a pedal wrench.

Without a complete breakdown of your bike and all it's parts, one would be hard pressed to tell you definitively what you need.

However, a good multitool and possibly a pedal wrench (depending on your pedals) may be all you need.

Outside the box possibilities.

Is there something that stops you riding your bike in the winter?

Yes winter is colder and wetter, and depending on your location there may be snow.

Perhaps a snow bike would be more year-round....

that's a rigid MTB with studded tyres for winter and commuter tyres for summer.

Second option is to look at hanging your summer bike without disassembling.

Wash and dry it, and hang it up high out of the way.

When summer (or a warm snap) comes you lower the bike, lube it, and ride.

Final option is to ride/ship your bike home and leave it there for winter.

You want as little stuff as possible in a dormitory.

Question: I have a bike that I would like to take apart to store for the winter. I live in a college dorm and don't have much space. What are the basic tools that I would need to take it apart?   I think taking apart the wheels, pedals, and handlebar will be enough.  Ex: Screwdriver, wrench  The bike is a Trek 7.2FX

List of tools to take apart a bike to minimise space for storage

To disassemble a bike, the tools you'll need are likely to be a set of metric hex keys (mostly 5 mm, possibly 4-8 mm), a thin adjustable wrench (maybe a pedal wrench too), a set of wrenches, gardening gloves to protect your hands. Alternatively, you could try to do the entire job with a multitool.

It is impossible to say for sure without knowing the bike, but the wheels can probably be opened with a wrench or quick release levers, the seat post with a hex key or QR lever and the pedals with a pedal wrench, hex key or box wrench. Remember that the pedal on the left hand side is cross threaded, and wear gloves to protect your hands. Many modern bikes may only need a multitool and possibly a pedal wrench, but older bikes in particular may require more tools.


I have a 1990 steel racing tandem, and sadly it gets more miles solo than with a stoker.

The main differences between tandems and solo bikes apply when riding a tandem on your own (rear wheel cuts corners more, you can't bunny hop) but points to note:

Cars may not see the rear of your bike, and may not anticipate the extra space required when pulling up or allowing room to turn.

Steering is a bit odd - it may be unique to mine, but if the solocaptain doesn't commit to a corner with enough lean, the bike tries to stand up straight and go straight.

Braking - its still possible to raise the back wheel clear off the ground when doing an aggressive brake with just a captain.

And the stoker's bars may get in the way of your backside if you lean backwards.

Drag brake is less effective with no stoker.

So big descents you have to ride more like a solo bike.

You may get heckled with "Your passenger fell off!"

so have a witty retort like "Bugger -

so that's why she stopped nagging!"

or "Damn I thought we were going slower than normal!"

Speed is generally not an issue - I've topped 40 km/h solo on my tandem, and the previous owner exceeded 70 km/h on it on a race, with two riders.

Doesn't seem like too big a deal.

It should be similar to having someone on the back who's not pedaling, only lighter and faster.

I have a tandem

and I have ridden it solo.

It's not hard from a handling point of view, and at least with mine it's easier than riding tandem – it's just riding a bike with an exceptionally long rear end.

Sure, more friction and a lot more weight, but overall something any cyclist with a tiny amount of experience can handle.

Riding a tandem solo isn't a big deal.

It's just a big long heavy bike; as others have said easier than riding a tandem with a stoker if they're not putting much power in.

Apart from the "funny" comments you get, the only actual issue I've noticed is that you don't get so much grip on the back wheel without the weight over it.

I tried standing on the pedals going up a hill and found the wheel would spin.

It will certainly be more difficult than riding a standard bicycle.

Although I don't feel like it would be impossible by any means.

The factors to consider are: Weight -

the Tandem weighs a lot more than a standard bicycle Wind - larger surface area means more effect from crosswinds Length -

This will play very little with the transport as far as riding it to a friends house, other than turning, but plays a major factor in future transport by car or bus Tandems have a pilot, and a stoker, the rear rider being the stoker, and all steering is done by the pilot or front riding.

Therefor the stoker is only there to help out with pedaling and enjoy the ride.

So yes it will be more difficult but I wouldn't rule it entirely impossible.

You will look lonely however ;)

It's usually easier than with a partner.

I've been on one home-welded tandem where the front and back pedal cogs had different number of teeth and thus were not synchronized.

That posed a problem for leaning into curves since the reflex of putting the inner pedal up did not match with the other pedal pair.

It's astonishing how much of a nuisance this can end up being (and when going solo, you had no warning).

I don't think that this happens with a stock tandem however.

Question: About 4 miles away from me, there is a bike hire shop that has tandems. I'm trying to work out the logistics of getting the tandem to my house to pick up the other rider.  I'm an experienced cyclist, but have never ridden a tandem before. It's not convenient for both of us to go to the shop. Is riding a tandem particularly difficult for one person?  I suppose I'll get the bus there...

Is it difficult for one person to ride a tandem bike?

Many cyclists appear to be of the opinion that, contrary to what you would believe, riding a tandem alone is often easier than riding with a partner. Things to look out for, however, include a heavier bike, a longer bike so needs to be taken into consideration when cornering and back wheel coming off the ground in an emergency stop,

It is certainly possible, but the longer rear and heavier weight will make it more difficult to ride and handle than a solo bike. Cars may not expect the extra length at the back, and the lack of a rear rider will affect traction and braking on the rear wheel. Normally the captain controls the steering and braking anyway, so handling may be easier than with a partner and the difficulty will depend on whether the partner is normally pulling their weight.


When shopping for BSO bikes, people are just looking for a recreational ride that is a once in while, which leads them to focus on the sticker price.

Looking at a mountain bike they then get to thinking "Hey, I can ride this around town.

I can take it off roading if I wanted too.

", so more bang for their buck.

They also tend to look at the other components of the bike, hard narrow saddles just look uncomfortable, drop bars make one think they need to lay down to ride, thin narrow tires surely can't be a as comfortable as fat tires, and "why is there no tread pattern on this tire, it is just for nice weather racing".

Many BSO's are styled like mountain bikes, probably because the mountain bike features tend to be appealing to people who don't know a lot about bicycles.

Consumers buy these bicycles even though they will never use them on anything resembling a mountain trail.

A thick frame, thick, knobby tires, and suspension make a bicycle look rugged.

The appearance of ruggedness is cheaply achieved with inferior components that don't last, are poorly serviceable and heavy.

This is because the mere appearance of anything is cheaply achieved with a prop which looks like the real thing.

If consumers believed that road bike features comprise the best prototype for an all-purpose bicycle, then BSO's would be road-bike-shaped objects.

Even the very mass of a bicycle could be associated with ruggedness.

Consider that Beats by Dre headphones were found to contain metal weights that serve no purpose other than to make the product feel more massive.

This is because the consumer who knows nothing about audio or electronics thinks that a pair of cans that weighs more must be better.

(Though there is a point there: better loudspeakers tend to have more massive magnets, which make them more sensitive.)

(With regard to tires, there seems to be a widespread belief that the mountain bike tires will grip all kinds of surfaces better, including asphalt: in other words, that they are safer.

This is quite unfortunate.

Consumers should be educated, for the sake of their own safety, that smooth tires provide the best grip on a wet road, in addition to offering a smoother, quieter ride with less rolling resistance).

Someone shopping for a road bike is different from the crowd, and probably more knowledgeable than the average consumer.

Possibly much more knowledgeable.

They won't be duped by low-quality components.

It's much easier to make a chunky looking frame cheaply than to make thin tubing cheaply.

The heavier everything is supposed to be the less obvious

it is that the BSO is not what it looks like.

One key give-away is that the mountain bike is always marked "not suitable for off road use".

Road bikes also have to use more expensive components, specifically brifters (combining brake and shifter units in a single mechanism) where mountain bikes can use the separate brake and shifter mechanisms, even though they are often combined into one assemble to reduce the number of steps to put the bike together.

The same difficulty occurs when building cheap but effective caliper brakes, although the BSO solution there is IME to fit cheap and ineffective brakes (the shop I worked in spent a disappointing amount of time trying to find an affordable fixed-gear bike that wasn't a BSO).

What I has seen a lot of is more expensive BSOs that look like road bikes or fixies, but despite paying two-ten times what a BSO normally costs, they are still not usable bikes.

Most were steel framed, and often used Chinese "4130 CroMo" tubing (which if you see it unpainted is the wrong colour, and is both weaker than and fatigues faster than proper 4130).

In Australia a BSO can be had for under $50 if you shop around, and normally run up to about $200-$300.

But during the fixie fad we saw BSO-grade fixies costing up to $600 that we couldn't service for all the usual BSO reasons.

One was "fixed" by rivets through the drive cog into the hub, for example... and it was brought into the shop because the rivets were loose.

A lot of people think that narrow tyres are dangerous for anyone other than experts, and that the narrower the tyre, the more likely they are to fall off.

They also don't appreciate that there can be disadvantages in having suspension.

In addition to the other answers, the BSO appeals because it is not like the bikes in the purchaser's history.

Many BSOs forgo the traditional diamond frame in favour of big chunky monotube designs.

These bikes look nothing like the 70s/80s ten-speed, or the Raleigh 20 style, or the grifters and BMXs of my youth.

So when the parents want something "better" for their offspring, the different look appeals.

In complete opposition to the above statements, we also have the retro beach cruiser or coffee cruiser bikes.

These are a little above a cheap BSO, and have a sit-up-and-beg posture combined with sweeping handlebars and relatively few gears.

The pricing is about double what a cheap BSO costs, but the appeal here is the nostalgia and a

"this is what older people ride" mentality.

This could well be a regional variation.

I tend to see that most BSOs are "fast hybrid" commuter style bikes.

Straight handlebars, soft saddle, wide road tyres and road suitable gearing.

The mountain bikes that were so cool in my youth (1990s) have largely faded out and road bikes with drop handlebars that my father remembers dominating in his youth are coming back in.

Question: All department store bikes, that I have witnessed, are mountain bikes. Many of them are even full suspension and some feature dual-crown forks.  Why the lack of BSO (Bicycle Shaped Object) road bikes?

Why are most BSOs mountain bikes?

Many BSO's are styled like mountain bikes, probably because the mountain bike features tend to be appealing to people who don't know a lot about bicycles.  They also tend to look at the other components of the bike, hard narrow saddles just look uncomfortable, drop bars make one think they need to lay down to ride, thin narrow tires surely can't be a as comfortable as fat tires, and "why is there no tread pattern on this tire, it is just for nice weather racing".    Consumers should be educated, for the sake of their own safety, that smooth tires provide the best grip on a wet road, in addition to offering a smoother, quieter ride with less rolling resistance).  Moreover, the features of a mountain bike are easier to reproduce cheaply, however, most of these bikes are not suitable for off-road use.

People shopping for BSOs re often unable to evaluate quality, and are more likely to select a bike that looks rugged and suitable for use on and off road. Road bikes can look overly fragile and complex, discouraging casual buyers. It is also cheaper to produce heavy and bulky components that look strong, even if they are poor quality and liable to break or rust. The hard saddle and thin, smooth wheels of a road bike look uncomfortable and more dangerous than thick knobbly tyres, even though road tyres provide more grip on wet roads. There is some regional variation, as the predominant type depends on market demand as well as ease of producing cheap parts.


As a heavy rider personally, I don't have many issues with flats.

A normal tire on the high/maximum pressure works fine to avoid pinch flats.

The key is to check tire pressure every time you get on the bike.

Even a day will allow a tire to soften 10 psi, and that will allow flats to occur.

Road hazard flats are not avoidable except by avoiding the hazard in the first place.

Edit: to be clear, my answer is that it is most likely that your existing tires are not fully inflated, rather than that a different tire is needed.

We don't do product rec here, but some general advice: You want to find the biggest tires you can fit into the bike, and run them at high pressure.

The pressure written on the tire sidewall is useless (the maximum pressure depends on the rim and the tire), but in all likelihood you will be close to or exceeding it on many tires.

The particular model of tire won't really make a difference if you're pinch flatting them --

that is a symptom of too low pressure.

Also, riding on a flat tire is bad -- you can damage the rim and wheel that way.

If the biggest tire you can put in at the highest pressure you can run safely doesn't work out for you, consider switching to a rigid mountain bike, where you can easily get 2+ inch tires in, which will easily take 300 lbs.

Note that running at a high pressure leaves you vulnerable to other things like road hazards damaging the wheel.

You want the lowest pressure such that the rolling resistance is negligible, you avoid pinch flats, the tire absorbs some of the nature of the surface and keeps you in control of riding (i.e. no bouncing).

For a 300+ lb rider, this will be a pretty high pressure on many tires.

Also, remember tires are supposed to deflect a bit (visibly when you're on the bike), but not too much.

If they don't deflect, they're overinflated.

Do a web search for tandem tires.

A tandem bike carries two people, so typical loads are even bigger than you.

Also, definitely use a pressure gauge.

You may think you can tell by feel, but I ride every day and can't tell the difference between 80 and 100 psi.

This is close to my goto answer for tyre issues.

Tyres designed for touring use are meant for higher loads and inflation pressures.

I run marathon plus on my commuter hybrid.

They make a 26x2.0 version which is rated to a load of 260lb per tyre and 70psi inflation (which you could probably exceed a little).

It's possble that won't fit your rim (see Sheldon Brown ) or your frame/mudguards (flip the bike over and pad the tyre out to test it).

But you could go a step thinner.

As you've noted, your weight isn't split equally between the tyres - the back wheel carries more load.

You could try converting your tyres to a tubeless system.

I run much lower pressures on my tubeless mountain bike than I used to - they are super resistant to pinch flats.

Every now and then I can feel the rear wheel pinching in a way that would previously have caused an instant flat but to date no flats (touch wood!).

I find (anecdotal) that the tubeless tyres seem to lose pressure a little faster than normal inner tubes.

Combine that with regular pressure checks and you should be better off.

Schwalbe Big Ben or Big Apple tires.

Maxxis Hookworms.

I'm 450lbs and ride Maxxis Hookworms.

Which are 26X2.5 tire.

I always ride at maximum PSI.

ButThey might not fit in your forks.

I had to buy new forks for the tire to fit.

Another good beefy tire the Schwalbe Big Ben tires.

Rated for riders 350lb.

Which would most likely fit your bike with no alterations.

Question: I ride a hybrid on 26" rims currently fitted with hybrid tires.  As I am 300lbs+ the rear tire runs permanently deformed/flat and the rims ride over the rubber causing tire pinch.  Can anyone recommend the tyre tube combination that I should try to obtain that will stop this happening?

Heavy Rider (300lb+) - Please recommend a 26" tyre to avoid tyre pinch

A normal tire on the high/maximum pressure should work fine for the heavier rider to avoid pinch flats. The key is to check tire pressure every time you get on the bike. The existing tire may not be fully inflated so this should be checked out before changing tires. Switching to mountain bike tires or tandem tires is anothe option for the heavier rider.

Check your pressure to ensure that the tyre is fully inflated. Some deflection is normal, but it should not be soft enough to pinch or hard enough to damage the rim. Wider tyres would be helpful, and mountain bike, touring and tandem tyres are designed to take greater loads.