2 similar bikes, so what makes them hybrid and mountain?

Kernel_Sanders

I've spurned mountain bikes before simply because someone I thought knowledgeable told me they were heavy, much slower and less reliable. I've come across these two (both with a string of good reviews on Halford's website):
http://www.halfords.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_storeId_10001_catalogId_10151_productId_912123_langId_-1_categoryId_165534#tab2
http://www.halfords.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_storeId_10001_catalogId_10151_productId_922811_langId_-1_categoryId_165499#tab2
They have the same frame shape and 26" wheels. The Carrera hybrid is only 500g lighter and has more gears, so is it just the suspension and knobbly tyres that make the Raleigh a MTB?

custardy

There really isnt much difference with those
this is the bottom of the range you are looking at
If anything the 'MTB' had a taller stem than the 'hybrid'
its just names given to cheap bikes

Billy-no-Money

I don't think the term 'hybrid' helps one bit, and 'mountain bike' isn't particularly well-defined either.

There are specialist bikes that fit firmly into a category - but it's more helpful to think of bikes as a frame and components. It's about finding the right combination for your needs. In effect the majority of bikes sold to the general (non-sporting) public are some sort of hybrid.

There are no hard-and-fast rules; e.g. 26" wheels are commonly associated with mtb's, but with the right tyres are fine for commuting to work. Similarly, the bigger '700c' wheel can be used offroad if it's built strongly - e.g. cyclocross bikes.

The Raleigh has more 'mountain bike' features (suspension forks, knobbly tyres) but it won't last long off road and those features will just make it unpleasant on road. (By off road I mean tough tracks, not gravelled cycle tracks).

Go back long enough, and a bike was just a bike - but some people adapted or built bikes for sports such as racing or mountain-biking.
Then as the car took hold bikes weren't popular for day-to-day use, but the sports continued - so by the mid-nineties we basically had road bikes (racing) and mountain bikes. Obviously people continued to buy bikes for getting around, but their numbers were much reduced.

So then cycling started to become popular again - and the industry responded by adapting sports-oriented bikes - mixing components from each sport and calling the result a hybrid.

In other words, the bike industry in this country has turned inside out and is only slowly re-orienting itself to normal non-sporty people.

So a 'hybrid' to me is a bike that's not built for a specific sport - simple!

Most 'mountain bikes' have gearing which is far too low for road use; most 'road bikes' have gearing which is too high for day-to-day use. Sadly the public seems to get sold one or the other, not something in between.

(The Dutch continue to build bikes for comfort, not speed. That's what most people need. But marketing convinces the British otherwise; just as with cars we buy low-profile alloy wheels and then complain when we can feel the bumps in the road).

ariba10

Unless you are going in for competitions, I do not understand the worries people have with the weight of a bike.

If it is for commuting or pleasure 500grms is nothing.

-- Usually the more you pay the better the bike. --

Kernel_Sanders

Billy-no-Money wrote: »

The Raleigh has more 'mountain bike' features (suspension forks, knobbly tyres) but it won't last long off road and those features will just make it unpleasant on road.

Wow, that was a comprehensive answer, informative and well written - thanks! OK, I'm seriously considering ordering one of these two bikes today (last day for Carrera web offer, I think). If I get the Raleigh, I'll be swapping the tyres for these 26 x 1.75" from my old Powerbyke:


They are stamped 'mountain bike' but as you can see aren't knobbly, so probably as fast as the Carrera's CST hybrid tyres? How would the Raleigh's suspension make it unpleasant on-road? It only appears to add 800g to the overall weight, the significance of which depends on how much the bike costs, so people on here keep telling me! The roads around here are pretty dreadful, especially near the kerb where there are lots of uneven sections. I'm middle-aged, although my legs now feel older. My aim is to get from A to B with as little effort and as cheaply as possible. I won't be pedalling hard downhill as increased wind resistance means less efficient cycling, so I'm not too bothered if the Raleigh's gearing isn't high enough.
The £55 price difference is significant to me, although this will be reduced by applying code B13BK01 which gives 10% off Halfords bikes.
Would anyone care to peruse the specs (just scroll down) and comment on the value-for-money aspect of these two machines, please?

custardy

The suspension loses you momentum(given its a cheap set)
so you will be pedalling harder to make the same speed as a rigid bike
getting from A to B with as little effort as posssible mansa you want something leaning towards the road end than MTB
using a (high end) MTB was about 10-15 minutes slower on my commute than using my £500 Hybrid

VFM in those 2 machines isnt really going to mean much
they are both(and Im no snob) bargain basic machines)
The Subway would be my choice of the two

As for pedalling downhill
The extra gears are more pertinant in smaller gaps between shifts. meaning you have more chance of being in the most efficient gear at a given time/situation
18 vs 21 doesnt mean you have 3 higher gears

photome

On both your threads about bikes you are obsessed with weight despite being advised many times that for your budget it isn't that important.

The carrerra subway is very hot on HUKD, not forgetting you can get extra discount

Kernel_Sanders

custardy wrote: »

The extra gears are more pertinant in smaller gaps between shifts. meaning you have more chance of being in the most efficient gear at a given time/situation
18 vs 21 doesnt mean you have 3 higher gears

If you're just saying that the range of gears may be no different then I understand that, it's just that one reviewer for the Raleigh wrote The top gear is not as big as I expected; in fact I seem to be able to ride in top gear almost the whole time, which suggests the gearing is too low.

photome wrote: »

On both your threads about bikes you are obsessed with weight despite being advised many times that for your budget it isn't that important.

It's true that I've mentioned weight a number of times but noone has explained why it's less important at the bottom range. Halfords are claiming the Carrera is a £400 bike, so would that make any difference? I've just discovered the excellent Bike Radar site, and £400 would appear to be a quality threshold.

Johnmcl7

Of those two I'd go for the Carrera, the spec looks good for the price particularly the gear shifters and the quick release alloys (if the spec is correct) as the latter makes it a whole lot easier to fix a puncture on the go.

You've mentioned you want to get from A to B as easily as possible which favours the Carrera, it doesn't sound like you're going to be using it on rough stuff and if that isn't the intention I'd be upping the budget for a better mountain bike. I don't like cycling on the road with a suspension fork and even on mild off road I keep the suspension locked as it just saps your power while pedalling. While the ride can be rougher on my hybrid and road bike which are both on slick tyres it's worth the tradeoff for the easier pedalling performance.

John

Kernel_Sanders

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

it doesn't sound like you're going to be using it on rough stuff and if that was the intention I'd be upping the budget for a better mountain bike.

Surely you mean hybrid, or even road bike?

Johnmcl7

Kernel_Sanders wrote: »

Surely you mean hybrid, or even road bike?

No, I was referring to if you were wanting to ride on rougher stuff (forest trails and similar) then you'd be better upping the budget to get a reasonable mountain bike rather than go for the Raleigh. I've reworded it to make more sense hopefully.

John