Cycling UK Forum

Hi all

I have a 10+ year old Koga which I use for commuting. I have started venturing out on longer runs in and around the Downs in Sussex/Surrey and find the Koga hard work going up hills.

It has hub gears (8 speed). Weighs around 16KG. Mudguards and paniers.

I'd like to treat myself to something lighter and with more gears to help me get up the hills.

However, I would still need to have mudguards and paniers and so on and therefore I will want a hybrid. I am looking at something like a Trek FX series and with the fittings that would come in at around 13KG.

How much difference would that 3kg saving and extra 13 gears make?

I also have to buy it a little "blind" as it is impossible it seems to get a test ride in a shop and I'm told its a four or five month delivery time given the demand.

Any thoughts welcome as I'm not that knowledgeable on cycling!

Thank you

In my opinion you will notice a 3kg difference. The larger number of ratios will also make hills a lot easier. The brakes should also be a decent improvement also.

I would go for it

Hi,
So Trading one hybrid sit up and beg bike for a slightly lighter version?
What's your age?
Perhaps be a bit more adventurous and go for something like a cross bike, or it can be just A touring bike.
Touring bike will take mudguards racks et cetera will have the gears And you can always change the tires and use it for something more sporty if you want.
It's only and Idea

I have a giant rapid 1 that I've used for 3 years. It's around 10kg and Tiagra group set so 10x2 gears, hydraulic brakes, takes mudguards and rack. Great wee bike.

Loosing 3Kg and getting a better spread of gears should easily add a bigger grin to the smile factor.

I'll add to those saying 3kg is definitely a noticeable weight loss.

As for the number of gears, yes you'll notice, but what really counts is the range; the difference between the lowest and highest gears. More gears doesn't necessarily mean wider range; you'd have to check and compare.

Also, to combine lighter weight with pannier racks and mudguards, you might want to look at some (hardtail or even fully rigid) mtbs, though you'll probably want to change the tyres if you're riding mostly on tarmac.

Thank you, all.

It seems as if I will notice the difference.

I hadn't thought about a touring bike, to be honest, so will look into that. I thought they were much of a muchness with hybrids except touring bikes had the drop handlebars? Any other "key differences" I ought to be aware of?

Thanks again. Love this forum.

r

Do you have the option for a second bike?

Keep this one for your commuting and just buy a cheapish and lighter second hand road bike or touring bike for the longer rides.

This website gives a visual comparison of the difference in gearing between the Trek FX3 with 46/30 chainset and 11-36 cassette versus an Alfine 8 geared bike (I've assumed your chainset has twice the number of teeth on the sprocket, i.e. 36 and 18, but you can alter these if that is not the case).

In short, yes you will notice a 3kg weight saving. However, I suspect you will appreciate lower gears even more.

I would agree with the suggestion of considering a touring bike. Spa are a good brand, and will build up their steel touring frame with whatever components you want. They list two suggested builds with flat bars with 3 x 8 speed or 3 x 9 speed. The bikes have rim brakes instead of disc brakes, and come with mudguards and a rack.

9 speed flat bar build - £945

ex-demonstrator version of above - £835

8 speed flat bar build - £750

I would recommend that you get any of the above with 46/34/24 or 46/36/24 chainrings (they will fit whatever chainrings you want, but it would probably be an upgrade on the 8 speed). With a 9 speed 12-36 cassette, you would have a couple of gears even lower than the bottom gear of the FX3 (comparison here), which I suspect you would soon appreciate if you are riding around the Downs with panniers.

TheManOnTheBus wrote:Thank you, all.

It seems as if I will notice the difference.

I hadn't thought about a touring bike, to be honest, so will look into that. I thought they were much of a muchness with hybrids except touring bikes had the drop handlebars? Any other "key differences" I ought to be aware of?

Thanks again. Love this forum.

r

The biggest differences between touring bikes, and other sorts tend to be a matter of practicality for doing stuff with baggage. Touring bikes come with both flats & drops. They usually have a slightly longer wheel base, including a bigger rear triangle than 'road' bikes to accomodate panniers, and not kick them. They also tend to have lower gears, and ride better with weight than other bikes.

An audax bike, which is sort of between a tourer and a road bike, might be another possibility for you. They usually have drops, though.

Similar story about a year ago, when i decided to use my IGH bike for longer rides, as i'd moved my road bike to italy.

I liked the IGH for work, and thought i'd use it as a all rounder, but started to reset dragging it up bigger hills, and ended up fixing up something cheap off ebay to go on longer rides.

It wasn't so much the weight of the bike, (i don't bother with panniers and mud's), but as soon as you get the IGH on anything too steep the rear wheel weight feels like your pulling up a trailer.

I'm dubious that you'll lose 3kg.
It's the sort of difference I'd expect to see between a road bike and a hybrid at the same price point.
As for whether you'll notice the weight loss, it's easy to find out for yourself - Just remove the weight from you current bike (racks, guards, lighter tyres, lights...) and go for a few hilly rides. IME the actual weight loss will have a minimal effect, though a lighter bike can feel nicer to ride for other reasons.
I like hub gears, but I find they do alter the way I climb hills. My perception it that there is an inefficiency, both with my Alfine and Rohloff, yet that is countered by the ability to easily change gear on a hill where it would be awkward to do so with a derailleur bike. When I go riding in the Peak District it always feels like I've been faster on the derailleur bike, yet the Garmin says that isn't the case.

Trigger wrote:Keep this one for your commuting and just buy a cheapish and lighter second hand road bike or touring bike for the longer rides.

+1
If you have the money and the space this would also be my preferred option.

The gears will make the most difference I would think, esp on the hills.

A rule of thumb - you'll be getting derailleur gears, look for a setup wher the smallest chainrings is smaller than the two largest rear sprockets, that way you'll get a nice low gear for the hills. Unless you are going to pedal at more than 20mph (I rarely do) then you won't need the higher gears.

Dropped bars will allow you to get a bit lower if you've got a headwind.

My day-to-day bike (dropped bar tourer with mudguards, rack) is about 12.5kg (before I add the toolkit, water bottles and sarnies!, front chainrings are 26/36/46 and the rear is 11-32 8-speed. (11 13 15 18 21 24 28 32). I rarely use the 11 tooth rear sprocket, I usually stop pedalling at about 20mph going downhill, and even more rarely do I stand on the pedals, just get a lower gear and twiddle them round-and-round while I admore the view. (i.e more of a rambler than a runner!)

A tourer doesn't have to have drop bars, though most in Britain do. If you've only used flat bars up to now, have a go on a friend's drop bars, or maybe try something out in a shop (don't know how it is where you are but some have been open the whole time here), before committing, because it is a change. Personally, I don't get on well with straight, flat bars as currently fashionable on flat-barred bikes, but it's highly personal.