Heavy Rider

General cycling advice ( NOT technical ! )
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20697
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by Vorpal »

Bonzo Banana wrote: 3 Jun 2021, 8:44pm I think bikes mostly will cope at first but you prematurely shorten the life of the frame by increasing the level of fatigue. The frames are designed to last about 7-10 years of use within their weight limits but excessive loads could cause instant failure but much more likely to reduce that lifespan perhaps to only a couple of years.
Where do you get the design life from? That's not something that manufacturer's publish. Even if it is correct for other materials, it is not with regard to steel. Steel frames are designed to not exceed the fatigue limit. Off-the-shelf frames are likely designed for 85th or 90th percentile usage, which will be a combination of rider weight, usage, road conditions, luggage, etc. all combined into a stress model in the frame.

A strong or heavy rider might exceed the strength or fatigue limit of a lightweight bike, but few riders, even very heavy ones, will exceed the fatigue limit of an expedition bike, using it mainly for every day cycling.

Steel that stays within fatigue limits has a theoretically infinite life, limited by things like rust, damage, etc.

Note that I am not saying that a steel frame will last forever. But if looked after, it will last years & years & years. Many people ride bikes that are 70 or years old. The oldest bike in our house is 60 years old, and the oldest regularly ridden one is almost 30 years old.

(also minor point on usage: riders do not technically increase the fatigue, but the stresses, which can lead to fatigue.)
Bonzo Banana wrote: 3 Jun 2021, 8:44pm Some brands have had a huge number of recalls for failing frames like Decathlon.
Do you have some evidence for this?
Bonzo Banana wrote: 3 Jun 2021, 8:44pm Some brands do go the other route and have more overbuilt frames.
I'm not sure what you mean by overbuilt. They design frames for the market they want to target. Additional strength & durability has a reason, otherwise it's just extra cost.
Bonzo Banana wrote: 3 Jun 2021, 8:44pm Manufacturers and importers have to clearly state the weight limits on bikes so the buyer can make an informed choice but obviously some people choose a higher level of risk. It's not just about weight though, a very strong rider can prematurely fatigue the bottom bracket area and those who ride mountain bikes can be very light but do many aggressive jumps and landings and do damage. The weight of the rider isn't the only factor in how a frame or forks can fail in use.
I don't think that the manufacturer's weight limits actually do much to inform buyers. Some manufacturers are more cautious than others, and we don't have any way to know to what extent usage profile and caution have contributed to their weight limits. I agree with TC. It is largely backside covering, peppered with getting-out-of-warranty-claims.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20697
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by Vorpal »

slowster wrote: 3 Jun 2021, 1:58pm Given how often there are threads started by new members asking this question, it would be good if there were a thread in Too Good to Lose containing links to the most informative past threads on this subject (and probably also to any particularly inspiring threads, such as Pizza Man's). Obviously those threads could be found by new members using the search facility, but I doubt a single search would throw up all the best threads, and a new member or anyone just searching this forum would potentially be faced with having to read and sift through many threads, and having to try to determine for themselves which posts contained the best information. It would be better for the forum to select the best threads and provide links to them in one place.

That could also be a starting point for collating the best advice from various threads into a single document/post. Given how often these threads occur, it seems that there is no easily findable guidance for people who are significantly overweight and wish to start cycling. Publishing such guidance is something which should fit with CUK's aim of making cycling more accessible to people who face significant barriers to riding a bike, such as being disabled or belonging to some minority group. I suspect it's also guidance which the NHS would like to have in a form which was suitable for GPs and consultants to give to their patients.
If you, or someone else were willing to compile such a thing, I'd be happy to put it in too good to lose. I don't have time to do it at the moment, but I will put it on the proverbial back burner, along with the saddle advice thread, and first tour thread. :oops:
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Pub
Posts: 4
Joined: 3 Jun 2021, 9:57am

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by Pub »

Thanks for all the replies.

As I first said if I was in America this doesn’t seem an issue as there are plenty of options. I don’t know the specifics or technical jargon of frames and wheels etc but there seems to be many available that are near as dam it bomb proof lol.

I’ve done plenty of research myself and even phoned “An Expert”....apparently in a very well known shop who advised me to go electric (I’m not ruling that out) but said I needed a bike which cost over £7000.....
For biking around town where each trip will be a maximum of 2 miles start to finish seems very overkill.

A custom wheel builder quoted me nearly £2000 but I have no idea how to even go about buying separate parts or putting them together.

I’ve decided to give myself a budget of £4000 which to me seems fair seeing I’m outside the normal size, but may be disappointed to find out there really isn’t anything out there for me.

Once again thanks for the replies.
CliveyT
Posts: 461
Joined: 13 Jun 2012, 2:55pm
Location: Cambridge

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by CliveyT »

Pub wrote: 4 Jun 2021, 9:07am
A custom wheel builder quoted me nearly £2000 but I have no idea how to even go about buying separate parts or putting them together.
I'll do them for £1000 :wink:
Spa cycles have a 6week lead time on hand built wheels but I think they used to be £50+parts , so even with their most expensive parts you'd have change out of £400
ClappedOut
Posts: 585
Joined: 30 May 2020, 12:43am

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by ClappedOut »

Decent frame and tandem rims.
Keep your power dry as £4k seems an excessive introduction to some thing .
Or you could buy a tandem if you have a stoker🤔 couldn't afford a decent spec EBike so I inlisted my son.


Start cheap and work upto your preferred option.
User avatar
Hellhound
Posts: 756
Joined: 19 May 2021, 7:39am

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by Hellhound »

Two of my old mountain biking pals were Clydesdale's and had no issues whatsoever.Pete,20st and Big Gav,25st have ridden their bikes up and down some serious terrain including the ski-lift assisted downhills in France.
One of our cycle club riders is around the 22st mark and rides a standard carbon roadbike with stock Mavic rims.
I'm sure the disclaimer weights are only there as a back up for manufacturers.Many quote 15st for carbon forks/frames but there are 1000s of club riders heavier than that riding these frames!

I'm sure that for what you're planning on riding you could get a bike for a lot less than £4k!!!
TimeTraveller
Posts: 189
Joined: 7 Mar 2019, 8:49pm

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by TimeTraveller »

I was over that weight when I started to cycle again after long illness, I used a cube attention 29er with rigid forks.
the bike is still going strong from 2016... had a few wheel issues ( buckles ) easy fix... but the bike is still as it was when I got it.

rode more and more off road as I lost weight so would say that bike took most of the weight for its firts two years.. no cracks no broken spokes

experts always oversell in my eyes..ride it till it breaks or needs fixing then you find your limits
Pete... I think
slowster
Moderator
Posts: 4612
Joined: 7 Jul 2017, 10:37am

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by slowster »

Pub wrote: 4 Jun 2021, 9:07am For biking around town where each trip will be a maximum of 2 miles
An Elephant Bike hasn't been been suggested by anyone else yet, but it will certainly have been suggested in one or more of the threads to which people have provided links above. These are reconditioned ex-Royal Mail bikes, and would probably be perfect for you.

https://www.cycleofgood.com/elephant-bike/

1. Inexpensive (<£400).

2. Designed for the short distance utility type riding which you want to use the bike for.

3. The 3 speed hub gear is very low maintenance, and the drum brakes are virtually zero maintenance. The bikes were designed and specified for the Royal Mail to cope with very hard usage.

4. All other things being equal, a smaller wheel will be stronger than a larger one. The 26" rear wheel on the Elephant Bike is ideal. Moreover, because it has a hub gear the rear wheel will be even stronger than a 26" wheel on an MTB fitted with derailleur gears. That is because there is minimal or no dishing of the wheel with the hub gear, i.e. the angle of the spokes from hub to rim is symmetrical.

5. The step through frame, racks, front tray and the stand make it supremely practical for round town use.

If you live in a town or city with lots of big/steep hills, it probably would not be as good a choice as an MTB, which usually have much lower gears, but otherwise it would be my first choice. It's a heavy bike, so if there is the odd hill for which the bottom of the 3 speed gears is not low enough, you can just get off and walk up it - that is what I do.

If you bought one and decided after a while that you wanted slightly lower gears, you can usually do that quite easily and cheaply by changing the sprocket on the rear wheel for a larger one. I've done that with my 3 speed because the top gear was higher than I liked and it also gave me a correspondingly lower bottom gear. It cost me less than £10 for the sprocket and a new (longer) chain.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20697
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by Vorpal »

Pub wrote: 4 Jun 2021, 9:07am
I’ve done plenty of research myself and even phoned “An Expert”....apparently in a very well known shop who advised me to go electric (I’m not ruling that out) but said I needed a bike which cost over £7000.....
For biking around town where each trip will be a maximum of 2 miles start to finish seems very overkill.
It is overkill, but there is some evidence that cyclists with electric bikes use them to extend their range & replace the car, rather than reducing effort, so if an electric bike appeals to you, there's no reason to eliminate one from consideration.
Pub wrote: 4 Jun 2021, 9:07am A custom wheel builder quoted me nearly £2000 but I have no idea how to even go about buying separate parts or putting them together.
That seems rather dear. For perspective, I spent about 1/4th that on new wheels 5 or so years ago, and they were 36 spoke touring wheels for my commuter. I live in expensive Norway, and would expect to pay rather less in the UK. The shops listed below can provide durable hand built wheels for much less than your wheel builder quoted. e.g. https://www.spacycles.co.uk/m10b0s176p3 ... ice-of-rim
Pub wrote: 4 Jun 2021, 9:07am I’ve decided to give myself a budget of £4000 which to me seems fair seeing I’m outside the normal size, but may be disappointed to find out there really isn’t anything out there for me.
With that kind of budget, I'd go to one of the shops that specialise in touring / expedition bikes:
Spa Cycles
SJS
Geoff Smith Cycles
Oxford Bike Works
Stanforth
Brixton Cycles
Edinburgh Bike Co-op
etc.

If you say what part of the country you are doing your shopping in (maybe you did & I missed it), folks can give specific recommendations?

That said, that is quite a lot of money to spend when you don't know yet how well you will like it, or what kind of bikes you like. I think slowster's suggestion of an elephant bike is a good one. You can always spend the money later, if you take to it, and then you can begin the lifelong task of accumulating bicycles ;)

If you don't take to cycling, you've still got good transport for short trips & aren't out too much money.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
arnsider
Posts: 448
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 12:44am
Location: Carnforth, Lancashire

Re: Bike Recommendation for Heavy Rider

Post by arnsider »

I restarted cycling on a fairly inexpensive Claud Butler Oddysey with a Reynolds 501 frame.
I am heavy I suppose and knock out at around 105 Kgs.
Over the years, I upgraded the Claud with Mavic Wheels, a Brooks B17 saddle, a pannier rack and anatomic bars.
This did me very well for lengthy day tours and the odd bit of commuting if I worked close enough to home.
Any steel framed hybrid with good running gear will suffice.
I say steel because alloy frames are a bit "Dead" and don't have the spring that steel ones do.
I did get a Thorn Nomad eventually and I really would recommend one. It was bomb proof and it took me and my gear on a number of holiday tours.
Bonzo Banana
Posts: 413
Joined: 5 Feb 2017, 11:58am

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by Bonzo Banana »

Vorpal wrote: 4 Jun 2021, 8:03am
Bonzo Banana wrote: 3 Jun 2021, 8:44pm I think bikes mostly will cope at first but you prematurely shorten the life of the frame by increasing the level of fatigue. The frames are designed to last about 7-10 years of use within their weight limits but excessive loads could cause instant failure but much more likely to reduce that lifespan perhaps to only a couple of years.
Where do you get the design life from? That's not something that manufacturer's publish. Even if it is correct for other materials, it is not with regard to steel. Steel frames are designed to not exceed the fatigue limit. Off-the-shelf frames are likely designed for 85th or 90th percentile usage, which will be a combination of rider weight, usage, road conditions, luggage, etc. all combined into a stress model in the frame.

A strong or heavy rider might exceed the strength or fatigue limit of a lightweight bike, but few riders, even very heavy ones, will exceed the fatigue limit of an expedition bike, using it mainly for every day cycling.

Steel that stays within fatigue limits has a theoretically infinite life, limited by things like rust, damage, etc.

Note that I am not saying that a steel frame will last forever. But if looked after, it will last years & years & years. Many people ride bikes that are 70 or years old. The oldest bike in our house is 60 years old, and the oldest regularly ridden one is almost 30 years old.

(also minor point on usage: riders do not technically increase the fatigue, but the stresses, which can lead to fatigue.)
Bonzo Banana wrote: 3 Jun 2021, 8:44pm Some brands have had a huge number of recalls for failing frames like Decathlon.
Do you have some evidence for this?
Bonzo Banana wrote: 3 Jun 2021, 8:44pm Some brands do go the other route and have more overbuilt frames.
I'm not sure what you mean by overbuilt. They design frames for the market they want to target. Additional strength & durability has a reason, otherwise it's just extra cost.
Bonzo Banana wrote: 3 Jun 2021, 8:44pm Manufacturers and importers have to clearly state the weight limits on bikes so the buyer can make an informed choice but obviously some people choose a higher level of risk. It's not just about weight though, a very strong rider can prematurely fatigue the bottom bracket area and those who ride mountain bikes can be very light but do many aggressive jumps and landings and do damage. The weight of the rider isn't the only factor in how a frame or forks can fail in use.
I don't think that the manufacturer's weight limits actually do much to inform buyers. Some manufacturers are more cautious than others, and we don't have any way to know to what extent usage profile and caution have contributed to their weight limits. I agree with TC. It is largely backside covering, peppered with getting-out-of-warranty-claims.
I thought I'd used the term 'fatigue rate' but perhaps not. The certification is about a minimum safety level and lifespan it wouldn't prevent bike frames from going on much longer but nowadays the industry is often focused on lightweight bikes which have a more finite life. I used to be a compliance officer and had access to the BSI certification site so I could read any of the certification as the site I worked at was licensed to use the BSI site. So I looked at bicycle certification from time to time back then despite not being the industry I was in. It's not hard to google decathlon bike recall or words to that effect. Bicycle certification involves a lot of testing including special rigs that simulate the ageing of frames by high speed flexing to create many years of life over just a few hours or days. The results will dictate what can be claimed by the manufacturer.

Cheaper steel frames with plain gauge tubes obviously sail through without issues but lightweight frames obviously sometimes struggle to achieve certification as you would expect. Obviously certification is about the minimum safety level that is acceptable, the minimum expected lifespan etc. Obviously making bikes lightweight is a huge factor in reducing the safety level making certification more critical. In the industry I was in many products made in China failed certification for various reasons and I'm sure the same is true of bicycles. I'm pretty sure fuji-ta have EU/US spec frames and chinese spec frames etc, The former stronger and certified for export. The latter not. Although the same frames perhaps could be tested to lower weight limits etc and certified for brands that have lower weight limits. In the industry I was in many of the products could just be tested until failure and then you could declare a weight limit below that with a healthy safety margin however I could be wrong but I think bicycle frames and forks are tested to a preset weight level that dictates the stated weight limits and if it failed new samples could be used to test at a lower weight limit or of course the frame design could be strengthened.

Frame flexing is a good thing for comfort but a bad thing for fatigue. Modern innovations like dropped seat stays that allow more flexing obviously help in comfort but shorten the life of the frame as they introduce more fatigue in aluminium frames. Carbon fibre has different rules as it allows strength to be localised in the frame more easily.

Anyway ultimately manufacturers have to give weight limits and this information is for the consumer to make an informed choice. Obviously if riders decide to ignore the weight limits given and the bike fails and kills them it is a decision the rider has made. Some people take such risks seriously others do not. I think the idea that the whole certification process is a farce and pointless is not a realistic viewpoint. For the average weight rider with typical use it probably can be ignored though.
mattsccm
Posts: 5095
Joined: 28 Nov 2009, 9:44pm

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by mattsccm »

This is being way over thought. Any hard tail MTB will have a frame tough enough. And decent low gears. Maybe chuck a set of steel rigid forks on if fancied. Even low end disc brakes will be fine. After a bit money could be spent on some nice wheels or what ever. My pub bike, a 1980s MTB would do the job if someone bothers to spend a tenner on the brakes.
My local wheel building ace charges 60p a spoke plus a tenner for wheels if you take him the rim and hub. Ask nicely and he'll find some XT hubs for a tenner the pair.
Govnor
Posts: 82
Joined: 6 Jun 2021, 8:33pm

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by Govnor »

Interesting can't remember seeing a weight limit on our old bikes mid 1990's. Mountain bikes.
Is this a new thing in lightweight bikes.

Also heavy riders are there tyre limits as we were looking and one make lower pressure than others.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20697
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by Vorpal »

Bonzo Banana wrote: 5 Jun 2021, 11:51pm
Vorpal wrote: 4 Jun 2021, 8:03am Do you have some evidence for this?
It's not hard to google decathlon bike recall or words to that effect.
If you use https://ec.europa.eu/safety-gate-alerts ... /webReport and check for safety notices using the search term 'bicycle', Specialized gets more hits than Decathlon products. There are a few B'Twin products, but given the number of bicycles they sell around Europe, I don't think that they have an unusually high number of notices. One would need more information about total sales to make any sort of comparative analysis.
Bonzo Banana wrote: 3 Jun 2021, 8:44pm The certification is about a minimum safety level and lifespan it wouldn't prevent bike frames from going on much longer but nowadays the industry is often focused on lightweight bikes which have a more finite life. I used to be a compliance officer and had access to the BSI certification site so I could read any of the certification as the site I worked at was licensed to use the BSI site. So I looked at bicycle certification from time to time back then despite not being the industry I was in. It's not hard to google decathlon bike recall or words to that effect. Bicycle certification involves a lot of testing including special rigs that simulate the ageing of frames by high speed flexing to create many years of life over just a few hours or days. The results will dictate what can be claimed by the manufacturer.
Well, I used to be a test engineer. I never tested any bicycle frame, but my specialty was fatigue testing. Any bicycle design that produces
a fatigue failure during safety certification test has a substantial design or quality issue. The loads are 1000 N (270 pounds) per crank for 100 000 cycles. That might sounds a lot, but at 80 rpm and 10 mph, it's only about 200 miles. So, I would agree that it is about minimum safety level, but doesn't really have much to do with lifespan or ageing. If I were writing a test spec like that, I would call it an 'early fatigue test' or something like that.

For anyone who is interested, my reference is BS EN ISO 4210 Cycles — Safety requirements for cycles series of standards
mattsccm wrote: 6 Jun 2021, 8:58pm This is being way over thought. Any hard tail MTB will have a frame tough enough. And decent low gears. Maybe chuck a set of steel rigid forks on if fancied. Even low end disc brakes will be fine. After a bit money could be spent on some nice wheels or what ever. My pub bike, a 1980s MTB would do the job if someone bothers to spend a tenner on the brakes.
My local wheel building ace charges 60p a spoke plus a tenner for wheels if you take him the rim and hub. Ask nicely and he'll find some XT hubs for a tenner the pair.
I mostly agree. The OP has a good budget, and probably doesn't want your pub bike, though :wink:
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
slowster
Moderator
Posts: 4612
Joined: 7 Jul 2017, 10:37am

Re: Heavy Rider

Post by slowster »

Vorpal wrote: 4 Jun 2021, 8:24am
slowster wrote: 3 Jun 2021, 1:58pm Given how often there are threads started by new members asking this question, it would be good if there were a thread in Too Good to Lose containing links to the most informative past threads on this subject (and probably also to any particularly inspiring threads, such as Pizza Man's). Obviously those threads could be found by new members using the search facility, but I doubt a single search would throw up all the best threads, and a new member or anyone just searching this forum would potentially be faced with having to read and sift through many threads, and having to try to determine for themselves which posts contained the best information. It would be better for the forum to select the best threads and provide links to them in one place.

That could also be a starting point for collating the best advice from various threads into a single document/post. Given how often these threads occur, it seems that there is no easily findable guidance for people who are significantly overweight and wish to start cycling. Publishing such guidance is something which should fit with CUK's aim of making cycling more accessible to people who face significant barriers to riding a bike, such as being disabled or belonging to some minority group. I suspect it's also guidance which the NHS would like to have in a form which was suitable for GPs and consultants to give to their patients.
If you, or someone else were willing to compile such a thing, I'd be happy to put it in too good to lose. I don't have time to do it at the moment, but I will put it on the proverbial back burner, along with the saddle advice thread, and first tour thread. :oops:
At some point I will do some searches and put together a list of links to previous threads on the subject.

Going further than that and summarising the best advice would be far less straightforward, because it would obviously require making judgements about what was the best advice, and similarly editorial decisions about what to include versus what to leave out.
Post Reply