Not signed in (Sign In)

Category Filter

Welcome, Guest

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

Vanilla 1.1.8 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    •  
      CommentAuthorpocky
    • CommentTimeAug 9th 2015
     
    Nerdo, I think the one you want is this:

    Nihola Dog : a cargo bike for dog lovers

    I am really enjoying looking at all the bikes at usefulbikes.info::lols at Dan's great photoshopping job:: ::slowly stops laughing:: ::googles:: ::kills self:: -tinyhonkshus
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeAug 9th 2015
     



    That is Nat chasing a giant fluffy dog in a bakfiets."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeSep 29th 2015
     
    You're welcome







    "life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
  1.  
    bewwwwnerrrrrri mean that looks like a 10 cat bag, easy
    •  
      CommentAuthornerdo
    • CommentTimeSep 29th 2015
     
    Worstcase I'll just zip tie on a seat... but i'd rather not. —Zev (who else)
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 11th 2016
     
    I couldn't figure out how to steal a photo from instagram, but look at this thing. Dayum."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 25th 2016
     

    UNHG LOOK AT THIS PROPORTIONAL 24" BIKE.

    That's some sloppy-ass bar wrapping, though."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthorpocky
    • CommentTimeJan 26th 2016 edited
     
    That thing must be amazingly tiny and perfect. It's got me thinking about how fucked up bike geometry is for small people.

    Here's an interesting example. This 14" Lurch is the smallest production fatbike available:

    BikesDirect apparently either didn't think this through or didn't think anybody would notice, so they put 175mm cranks on them. Also, think about this for a second. This is a bicycle with a 190mm rear hub and a 9" q-factor:


    Compare that to my 19" Nashbar, also with 175mm cranks. Looks much more "normal", doesn't it?
     photo 10506649_10204193229174830_4484926314490150212_o_zpsmpmrh7yb.jpg
    This bike has only a 170mm rear hub, and the q factor even then feels pretty damn big to me -- and I'm 5'11". If you're a 5'2" person riding a 14" bike with a 190mm hub, it must feel like you're pedaling the sides of a horse.::lols at Dan's great photoshopping job:: ::slowly stops laughing:: ::googles:: ::kills self:: -tinyhonkshus
  2.  
    well...it is bikesdirect..so you can't expect muchsomebody turn the lights off on this place already.
    • CommentAuthorMJ
    • CommentTimeJan 27th 2016
     
    Big part is to obviously keep cost down by using existing parts, but without going to "specialty" sized components, what other options would be available?

    I'm about as average sized as you can get for bike sizing, sans my preference for 165mm road cranks, and finding those is a pain in the ass without paying an arm and a leg.
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 27th 2016
     
    ^ like forcing everyone to use one wheel size. Increases profits, makes a lot of garbage bikes for people who aren't average-sized dudes!"life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 27th 2016
     
    I think it's important to remember that they used to make a variety of excellent proportional bikes for smaller people, they just don't anymore, and that was a choice."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthorseanile mick
    • CommentTimeJan 27th 2016 edited
     
    exactly. It's a business. Crap quality or not, you cant seriously expect every business to accommodate outliers just because they exist. They'd all go broke and then the world would be left with zero options. Even the most ethical of companies don't attempt that. That's when specialist companies come into play, like those big & tall stores. And even then, the market can only support one of those entities, so the quality and range of options are, once again, probably not to your liking.. Cycling is already inherently unprofitable, so supporting the edges of the bell curve is a non-sustainable business venture.somebody turn the lights off on this place already.
    •  
      CommentAuthornerdo
    • CommentTimeJan 27th 2016
     
    ^Gap in the market. I smell a business opportunity for the right tiny frame builder.Worstcase I'll just zip tie on a seat... but i'd rather not. —Zev (who else)
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 27th 2016 edited
     
    Crazy how all these manufacturers USED TO make these things, even before most of them outsourced their production to cheaper labor markets to further inflate owner's profits. This is one of the few industries I can think of that suddenly decided "let's limit our product to one segment of the population. That'll really strengthen and expand our customer base". Believe it or not, I'm not a fucking outlier. In many parts of the world 5'2" is exactly average and in more than a few places that's above average. What's you're excuse for the ever-increasing fat wheel sizes? 29" with stupid huge tires? 27.5 replacing 26"? Humans aren't growing with bike fashion trends. It seems like enormous parts of the population are being purposely excluded, which can't be good for business."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
  3.  
    Wikipedia said median height for women is 5'4", average is 5'5", and yet it's difficult to find a bike if you're under 5'4", not sure that's exactly in the taili mean that looks like a 10 cat bag, easy
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 27th 2016
     
    Google says 5'2" for women 5'6" for men, but if you look at the wikipedia breakdown by country it varies widely and interestingly. Point is, fuck this shit. That's a sweet fucking bicycle up there."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthorseanile mick
    • CommentTimeJan 27th 2016 edited
     
    Nandy:Crazy how all these manufacturers USED TO make these things, even before most of them outsourced their production to cheaper labor markets to further inflate owner's profits. This is one of the few industries I can think of that suddenly decided "let's limit our product to one segment of the population. That'll really strengthen and expand our customer base". Believe it or not, I'm not a fucking outlier. In many parts of the world 5'2" is exactly average and in more than a few places that's above average. What's you're excuse for the ever-increasing fat wheel sizes? 29" with stupid huge tires? 27.5 replacing 26"? Humans aren't growing with bike fashion trends. It seems like enormous parts of the population are being purposely excluded, which can't be good for business.


    they USED TO because they weren't profitable ventures.
    5'2" is less than average for a woman 20-49yo, (it's 5' 4.25").
    it's also notably less than average for the american cycling industry because the men's market size is literally twice that of the women's market size in the US.
    looking at that more closely, women 5'2" and under account for 19.7% of the 20 to 49yo US female population. times that by .5 .06 (female market share), and you are not even 10% 1.2% of the US female cycling market.
    that is an unprofitable target market for an industry that has an incredible reliance on economies of scale and requires a not-insubstantial rate of turnover on inventory.

    let's step it up to 5'4". for those playing the home game, be sure to remember how 2+ inches on a bike can matter a whole lot on the "this feels good" vs "this is painful" scale while trying out bikes.
    for women up to 5'4", we get to just over 45% of the 20-49 yo US fem pop. 22.7% 2.72% of the female us cycling market. a more acceptable target, but still low and challenging considering the difficulties of making a bike that small that doesn't require an assortment of hard to get parts.
    but here's the kicker, look at the respective percentages for these various heights of 20-49yo fems:
    5'0" is 3%
    5'1" is 6%
    5'2" is 8.5%
    5'3" is 10.7%
    5'4" is 14.6%
    5'5" is 12.4%
    5'6" is 15%
    5'7" is 10.5%
    5'8" is 7.7%
    5'9" is 3.8%

    for reference, there are 161million women in the US.

    so, not only is it not a clean and symmetrical ellipses, the upper tail runs toward the men's heights and once the taller women begin to overlap with the men's sizes, those women's sizes' value increases. the economies of scale shows it's face.
    source
    other source
    other source
    other source

    so yes, you're very much a minority market representative. and no, it doesn't surprise me that a company trying to make a profit would sell to the profitable market segments.

    i want to be clear, because i'll bet this is how this would be construed, but i'm not excusing this reality from being a counterproductive cycle by way of lack of offerings potentially causing a lack of female participation, but these are the facts.


    edit:
    i did the original math wrong on the market share part.
    18% of americans bicycle at least once per year (http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/data/factsheet_general.cfm)
    2 times more men do so than women.
    so, men are 2/3rds of the number, leaving 6% of female americans bicycle.
    sooo instead of multiplying by ".5" up there, i should be multiplying by .06, because the number this is a representative percentage of is of the overall female population (161million).somebody turn the lights off on this place already.
    •  
      CommentAuthornerdo
    • CommentTimeJan 27th 2016 edited
     
    (7.125 billion / 2) .03 = roughly 107,000,000 women in the tiny range.

    (EDIT: Yes, yes, yes, I know I'm not paying any attention to your maths up there. I'm just saying that small percentages of huge numbers are also huge numbers.)Worstcase I'll just zip tie on a seat... but i'd rather not. —Zev (who else)
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016
     
    Well shit, good thing Americans are the only people who make and ride bikes on the planet. They should really put those carnival height bars at bike shop entrances, like "sorry, we only serve average American guys. Come back when you grow 6" taller, then you're a real adult worthy of bikes. Don't mention it on the internet either, some average American guys really like to excuse and protect the idea that bikes should be made only for them"."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthorseanile mick
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016 edited
     
    Nandy:Well shit, good thing Americans are the only people who make and ride bikes on the planet. They should really put those carnival height bars at bike shop entrances, like "sorry, we only serve average American guys. Come back when you grow 6" taller, then you're a real adult worthy of bikes. Don't mention it on the internet either, some average American guys really like to excuse and protect the idea that bikes should be made only for them".

    Youre not capable of having a conversation are you?somebody turn the lights off on this place already.
  4.  
    more porn less scornYou said time was infinite, so why the watch wrapped around your wrist?
  5.  
    You said time was infinite, so why the watch wrapped around your wrist?
  6.  
    You said time was infinite, so why the watch wrapped around your wrist?
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016
     
    Nandy:
    UNHG LOOK AT THIS PROPORTIONAL 24" BIKE.

    That's some sloppy-ass bar wrapping, though.
    "life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthora_lion
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016
     
    paul jameson:more porn less scorn


    i dunno, i was enjoying feeling tall for the first time in my life
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016 edited
     
    seanile mick:
    Nandy:Well shit, good thing Americans are the only people who make and ride bikes on the planet. They should really put those carnival height bars at bike shop entrances, like "sorry, we only serve average American guys. Come back when you grow 6" taller, then you're a real adult worthy of bikes. Don't mention it on the internet either, some average American guys really like to excuse and protect the idea that bikes should be made only for them".

    Youre not capable of having a conversation are you?


    I guess not when your entire argument is "bikes for average to tall American men only. Maybe a few ladies only if they fit into that height range. Short dudes can also fuck off. This is a perfectly sound economic plan. All those millions of people should be forced to pay 5x more for custom bikes. That's way more efficient". I wonder if more small people don't buy bikes because it's seen and reinforced by marketers as a snobby boy's club, or because there are so few bikes to actually buy? What's your solution, everyone stop riding bikes because the whole industry is apparently so unprofitable? Go full on Snobby Boy's Club, no one else allowed, because snobby boys apparently have all the money and no one else needs or wants to ride bikes?"life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    • CommentAuthorgc
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016
     
    paul jameson:

    this is what i want to be when i grow up.gone
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016
     
    nerdo:(7.125 billion / 2) .03 = roughly 107,000,000 women in the tiny range.

    (EDIT: Yes, yes, yes, I know I'm not paying any attention to your maths up there. I'm just saying that small percentages of huge numbers are also huge numbers.)


    You're also dividing all humans on the planet with Sean's "American women under 5'2"" guesstimate. In most of the countries that actually make these bikes, the average for women is more like 4'10"-5'2 1/2". America is not the whole world. There are millions and millions of people who need bikes in these sizes. I don't get why this is such a fight. Just say "yup, this is fucked" and get on with it. You don't even have this problem, you're tall."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthornerdo
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016
     
    ^Huh? I agree with you. :)

    My calculated-while-brushing-my-teeth guesstimate is certainly quite wrong, but however you slice it there are many many tiny humans in the world. Economics of scale doesn't cut it as an argument. I think the bigger problem is that we Americans treat bicycles as sporting equipment, and all the built-in marketing channels are gendered to the point of hostility toward women. My gf won't even go into a bike shop because she finds them so unpleasant.Worstcase I'll just zip tie on a seat... but i'd rather not. —Zev (who else)
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016 edited
     
    I know! I meant "you" as in "that other guy putting so much effort into this argument", haha.

    Most of the shops out here are even more hostile to women. It really sucks."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthorpocky
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016
     
    Tall privilege.::lols at Dan's great photoshopping job:: ::slowly stops laughing:: ::googles:: ::kills self:: -tinyhonkshus
    •  
      CommentAuthor6kidz
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016
     
    Scumbag mick: Is the male privilege size they make bikes for but still only buys custom then argues with small women about their personal experiences on the internet."Dude's just smashing fructosenormativity, lay off."
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016 edited
     
    aww, that's a little mean. I'm not mad, I just don't get why he's fighting this so hard. Custom bikes are cool and all, I have 2 and 2 secondhand customs, but damn I'd love to have some production choices too. I cringe whenever I see someone under like 5'5" on 700cs, and there's a lot of fucking people in that category. It's hard to jump straight to custom if you've never ridden a fun bike, and I meet people smaller than me almost daily."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
  7.  
    Nandy:It's hard to jump straight to custom if you've never ridden a fun bike, and I meet people smaller than me almost daily.


    QFTi mean that looks like a 10 cat bag, easy
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2016 edited
     
    I'm sure bike companies loose money on products all the time like the crazy expensive Specialized Shiv (the road version not triathlon) that probably didn't even sell enough to cover the cost of the molds (millions), let alone the R&D, production/shipment, etc. Some of it is probably calculated risk, or maybe someone just had their Bad Idea jeans on. So yeah it would be nice to see companies produce less profitable sizes, but who knows where they draw the line in terms of the profit margin.
    •  
      CommentAuthor6kidz
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2016
     
    If the bike companies cared about riders as much as they pretend to, they would make bikes that fit riders of all shapes and sizes, end of story."Dude's just smashing fructosenormativity, lay off."
    •  
      CommentAuthorpocky
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2016
     
    I think the deal with bikes like the Shiv is they're experimenting with new technology (at a loss right now) with the expectation that it's going to eventually become cheap enough to trickle down into the mainstream (for a profit in the future). That's what happened with things like hydroformed aluminum and carbon monocoque in the first place.::lols at Dan's great photoshopping job:: ::slowly stops laughing:: ::googles:: ::kills self:: -tinyhonkshus
    •  
      CommentAuthorpocky
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2016
     
    Also, you bet your ass the fact that the Shiv exists at all is getting people talking about Specialized again, and those people are buying a hell of a lot of Langsters.::lols at Dan's great photoshopping job:: ::slowly stops laughing:: ::googles:: ::kills self:: -tinyhonkshus
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2016
     
    What's a shiv? Specialized sucks"life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthornerdo
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2016
     
    They're bicycles made in prison out of any available materials laying around. They stab the competition and roll away unnoticed.

    Hashtag stupid name.Worstcase I'll just zip tie on a seat... but i'd rather not. —Zev (who else)
    •  
      CommentAuthorpocky
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2016
     
    Then there's also the Kona Stab.

    The story behind the name for these is amazing. They originally were going to call it the "Sex", and people got their panties in a twist, and they changed the name to something bloodthirsty just to prove a point, and nobody complained.::lols at Dan's great photoshopping job:: ::slowly stops laughing:: ::googles:: ::kills self:: -tinyhonkshus
    • CommentAuthorThreePete
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2016
     
    nerdo:They're bicycles made in prison out of any available materials laying around. They stab the competition and roll away unnoticed.

    Hashtag stupid name.


    Cannondale Scalpel
    •  
      CommentAuthornerdo
    • CommentTimeJan 30th 2016
     
    ^It's like a Shiv with a medical degree. Fancy!Worstcase I'll just zip tie on a seat... but i'd rather not. —Zev (who else)
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 31st 2016
     
    This is the p0rn thread, let's have some images of these terrible monstrosities the bike industry chooses to make instead of regular bikes for slightly smaller people.

    "life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJan 31st 2016
     
    Wheel size issue aside why can't someone that needs a slightly smaller size just put on an 80mm stem and lower the seatpost? I ride a 59cm frame but if I was forced to ride a 63cm that's what I would do, and it would work the same. Granted it I was racing on it I might have to slam the stem to get the drop I like...
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 31st 2016 edited
     
    ryan t:Shoe size issue aside why can't someone that needs a slightly smaller size just put on an extra pair of socks and stuff newspaper in the toe? I wear a size 10 boot but if I was forced to wear a size 11 that's what I would do, and it would work the same. Granted if I was hiking in it it might be uncomfortable...


    Must be nice to have frames in your size and only compromise fit and handling if you feel like it. Have you tried riding 68cm frames with 42" wheels? That might be a better comparison.

    Is this the kind of drop you like on your race bike?
    "life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJan 31st 2016
     
    I wouldn't think that a shorter stem or seatpost would compromise anything as long as it replicates the fit you would otherwise have on a smaller frame.
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 31st 2016 edited
     


    Are you for real? What's your range on this idea? Are you telling small people to just put a shorter stem on your 59cm bikes, because they work good enough for you? What are you, 6' tall? I'm going to go ahead and guess you haven't thought this through or done much research.

    DQ: what if the reach someone needs is shorter than the actual top tube? Negative stem?"life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJan 31st 2016 edited
     
    I mean, 59 is definitely not "average". 55 is closer to medium. Why don't you just raise the seat post and use a really long stem? All you have to worry about is the wheel base being weird and probably sacrificing some control. Imagine barely fitting over the top tube, or nutting yourself every time you come to a stop."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries