Talk:City bicycle

Lots of pictures instantly[edit]

Identify range of ECBs rather than pit old-fashioned city bike against latest other bikes[edit]

Differentiate types of city bike rather than pit old-fashioned city bike against latest non city bikes.

The main point of this article is to define high-end, contemporary styled ECBs with the latest features and show that it's a mistake to equate ECB with the omafiets (grandma bike) or old-fashioned roadster. The main audience for that point is the American who has just discovered Electra's Amsterdam model (a quirky imitation or simulation of an omafiets) and so thinks that they know what people are buying in bike shops in Holland or Denmark. That audience likes what they think of as "city bikes", but is woefully unaware of the range of ECBs that are popular and available in European bike shops; that audience equates one extreme endpoint on the range of ECBs with the entirety of ECBs.

Half of the bikes in the Batavus or Gazelle catalog can be considered city bikes (by virtue of having fenders, rack, lighting system, enclosed brakes, and hub gear) and most of the remaining bikes can be considered variants around city bikes. The old-fashioned city bike is only a fraction of the city-bike selection in the Batavus and Gazelle catalogs; most of our attention has to be drawn to the contemporary-styled bikes instead. Danish city bikes tend to straddle and combine elements from old-fashioned and contemporary bikes, resulting in timeless, aesthetic styling, rather than very old-fashioned or distinctively contemporary.

The mistake of equating all ECBs with the old-fashioned omafiets or roadster then opens up the opportunity for another audience -- the weight-fixated American-type expert cyclist -- to falsely pit the most old-fashioned ECB against the latest American hybrids, racing bikes, and mountain bikes. The result has been that I strive to define at least two opposite types of ECB, while American cycling experts try to center the article around the most staid, old-fashioned type of ECB and disparagingly pit ECBs against the latest American bikes and features -- a false dichtomy given that ECBs themselves have incorporated, in the high-end, contemporary styled approach, some of the latest technologies that are used in hybrid and mountain bikes, while remaining distinctively an ECB.

It cannot be emphasized enough, that there is a *range* of ECBs, which remain true to the usage-vision of ECBs (eg hop-on-and-go in any weather) while offering the buyer many choices and variants -- such as a folding version, a cheapie lower-end version (bottle dynamo, 3- or 7-speed hub rather than 8-speed), and old-fashioned vs. contemporary.

-- Mike Hoffman, Dec. 5, 2008

Recommendations for article[edit]

A major Copenhagen blogger and bike advocate wrote the following (edited):

The encyclopedia article and the commentary at Momentum magazine's blog article "Interbike 2008: Shifts in Bike Biz" -- http://www.momentumplanet.com/blog/walker/interbike-heralds-shifts-bike-biz are excessively Netherlands-centric. Instead, emphasize that 100 million people in Europe ride their bike each day, according to the European Cyclists Federation.

Brands like Kildemoes, in Denmark, make 100,000 bikes a year and Denmark alone has more bike brands than Holland. There are the Swedish brands and various German brands.

Great articles. Mention Copenhagen, Denmark; and countless German, Swiss, and Belgian cities with high usage rates. That conveys that that cycling is a normal everyday activity across wide swathes of the world, not just in quaint, quirky Holland.

-- Blogger's advice posted by Mike Hoffman, Nov. 7, 2008

Discovery of contemporary Dutch city bikes[edit]

Moebiusuibeom-en did a checkin with the comment: (By the way, contents of article is excellent, it just has to be organized in a more encyclopedic form)

This comment means alot to me. It's been a sacrifice and a long several-month journey to discovering and giving some of the first major U.S. exposure to contemporary Dutch city bikes.

Somehow I figured out that the old-fashioned Dutch bike is only penultimate, not ultimate -- how exactly did I "discover" the contemporary Dutch bike, from within the total American information blackout of that particular type of bike? I am interested in the process of discovery of ideas, due to my work in guitar amp system design and the theory and history of religious experiencing, and because I tend to take a certain stance of wishing to push the edge of any area I get involved in. This recounting could shed light to help improve the content of the article.

I was led to discover and break the news in the U.S. about *contemporary*-styled Dutch city bikes in the following sequence:

Grade school through college, was a major commuter/transportation cyclist. Shook my head at weekend sports cyclists in hills of Silicon Valley.
Did daily walks to recover from a serious fractured leg. At work I noticed bike commuters and a bike map of the city. I did daily recovery walks near a bike shop. I also walked, using 2 canes, to a cafe that had a bike map of the city.
Read Momentum magazine, starting with the Lance Armstrong cover in mid-2008, learning the general perspective of city bikes as opposed to sports and recreation cycling.
Test-rode bikes including Bianchi brand, Milano model, with hub gear.
Finally got a bike again.
Discovered the revolutionary webpage about bike usage in Amsterdam, written by a befuddled San Francisco cyclist.
Did Web searches for Amsterdam, bike, Dutch. Found the Gazelle web site. Found that they don't distribute to the U.S.
Looked at old-fashioned black bikes at Dutch Bike Seattle.
Left a memo at Gregg's asking "How can I get a contemporary-styled Dutch bike like people in Holland are actually buying?"
Gregg's manager phoned me saying they could order me a Batavus. They spelled the company name for me.
Looked up Batavus website and saw the clear distinction between old-fashioned vs. the predominant contemporary styling.
Test-rode old-fashioned black bikes at Dutch Bike Seattle.
Read Momentum and bike lifestyle websites and determined that only the old-fashioned style Dutch bikes were getting awareness in America.
Determined that Seattle Bike Supply was the distributor for the U.S., but their selection of Batavus bikes was shrinking during 2008.
Discovered the search technique of a Google image search for "stadsfiets" or "fiets", which instantly enlightens with a revelation in imaginal visions of contemporary Dutch city bikes (clear, trimmed skirt guards; hub gears; hub light system; O-lock).
Wrote extensive commentary at the Momentum magazine's blog article "Interbike 2008: Shifts in Bike Biz" -- http://www.momentumplanet.com/blog/walker/interbike-heralds-shifts-bike-biz
Determined that Fourth Floor Distribution was becoming the distributor for the U.S. and Canada, in conjunction with Curbside Cycle which is devoted to true city bikes.
Drafted the European city bike encyclopedia article and sent it to Momentum and Fourth Floor Distribution.
Did extensive Web research and confirmed that there is barely any awareness of this type of bike, the contemporary-styled Dutch city bike. Overcame the language barrier using machine translation of web pages.

As I drive and bike through this raging car-cult city, I hope -- it's such a long shot -- that the vision of Curbside Cycles can somehow come true, that providing a true appropriately equipped non-sports city bike can convert this car-cult city arrangement to become bike-aware and bike-friendly. We are so far, and need so much hope, against even the U.S.-influenced, sports-drunk bike industry.

-- Mike Hoffman, Nov. 4, 2008 (Obama was elected president as I composed this, with hundreds of students chanting in celebration in the university library)

City bike versus stadsfiets[edit]

Dear Mike. I found your message on the Dutch wikipedia talkpage of citybike[1]. To put it short: citybike and stadsfiets are not the same thing in the Dutch language/ Netherlands, as well as in the technical configurations of these two bikes. Van Dale is the biggest Dutch dictionary and is widely used here. Their paid service "Online Professioneel"-edition gives this definition on stadsfiets:

stads·fiets (dem) 1 gewone, degelijke fiets zonder veel extra accessoires Translation: stadsfiets: an ordinary, durable bicycle without many extra accessoires.

Their definition on citybike is:

ci·ty·bike (dem; meervoud: citybikes) 1 mountainbike met extra’s, zoals een spatbord, bagagedrager enz., waardoor hij voldoet aan de wettelijke voorschriften. Translation: citybike: a mountainbike with extra's [read: extra accesoires] like a fender, luggage carrier etc, by which it becomes in compliance with the [Dutch/European] law. This definition sounds weird to me,e.g. luggage carrier is not needed to be in compliance with the law. (Pdf: Dutch law technical specs bicycles (in Dutch))

About this article European_city_bike and the technical configurations of the Dutch stadsfiets and usage: there is quite some nonsense in the article about stadsfiets. To give you some clue on stadsfiets and what it is as more info to the dictionary definition :

single speed, or with internal hub gearing. No external gearing system.
the great majority don't have a Hub dynamo but a Bottle dynamo
luggage carrier can technically not be used for an adult passenger, it's too weak to hold the weight and will eventually break. Sitting position used not always sideways. --Sonty567 (talk) 17:26, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is multiply attested proof that adult passengers in Holland very often ride on the rack, regardless of the above claim and overgeneralization about strength of rack construction.

http://willothewisp.org/html/bicycle_culture.html -- "A rear luggage rack: absolutely essential. If choose not to have one then you do not have, family, or friends, you are alone in the world and you do not mind who knows it. Luggage racks are for people you know to sit side saddle on and hitch a lift from you. The luggage rack has two general functions; carrying luggage, and carrying a person."

Photos and a report that prove that adults very often ride on the rack in Amsterdam: http://www.ski-epic.com/amsterdam_bicycles/ -- "Multiple Riders on One Bike - With or without any extra seats or foot-pegs for the extra riders, you will see 1 or 2 or even 3 extra passengers side-saddle, balancing precariously, standing, sitting, whatever it takes so they can hitch a ride with a buddy or parent. This is so common I had to stop taking pictures of it because it would prevent me from capturing some of the other trends. Almost 50 percent of the bicycles I saw had more than 1 person on them."

"Another friend providing a passenger a ride. ... In the picture below, the guy is riding side saddle on the bicycle's luggage rack."

"Here the guy is peddling the bicycle, and the woman is hitching a side-saddle ride on the luggage rack. The thing that is hard to capture here is how relaxed and well balanced these passengers are without anything to place their feet on -- this is *NOT* the first time they have done this, most look slightly bored as the bicycle driver swerves through this crazy intersection in Amsterdam ..."

"I watched this cheerful girl hop onto the bicycle freight rack ... so I saw how "The Launch" is done. They made it look smooth and easy, but I have a feeling it takes a little practice."

A commentator in Amsterdam wrote: "the bloke riding on the back of the girl's bike ... The rule of thumb is that the bike's owner always does the pedalling, *unless* the passenger is much heavier, in which case (usually) he will do the work. Many people don't like others riding their bikes."

--MichaelSHoffman (talk) 22:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for distinuigshing between Dutch citybike vs. Dutch stadsfiets.

I agree about the Van Dale dictionary: "This definition sounds weird to me." A city bike is a mountain bike with fenders and rack attached. Yeah, right. Wikipedia is the definitive relevant reference, not a printed dictionary.

Using the "stads" category at online bike catalogs, and searching for images using "stadsfiets" or "fiets", many of the bikes tagged as such have more than 1 gear. http://images.google.com/images?q=stadsfiets

Many of them have a hub dynamo, not a bottle dynamo. The Gazelle and Batavus catalogs are more advanced that your definition of a stadsfiets; these brands are developing more evolved and full-featured stadsfietsen, not only the old-fashioned singlespeed omafiets with bottle dynamo.

Even the new omafietsen are increasingly coming with 7- or 8-speed hub gear and hub dynamo. These have become common on good brands in catalogs, especially for the contemporary-styled "stads" fietsen, which I think you call "citybikes".

-- Mike Hoffman, Nov. 15, 2008

http://www.gazelle.nl/nl/ -- Collectie menu: Collectie 2009 submenu: *Stadsfietsen* submenu: most bikes shown here have 7- or 8-speed hub gear and hub dynamo.

http://halfords.nl/NL/Fiets/home.htm -- FIETS tab: Fietsen menu: *Stadsfietsen* menuitem: Union brand. Most models have 7- or 8-speed hub gear and hub dynamo.

-- Mike Hoffman, Nov. 15, 2008

I'm sorry, but this discussion seems rather skewed toward Dutch uses, which might have a more appropriate place on the Dutch wikipedia page. Maybe I'm being overly simplistic, but the term city bike, logically, refers to any bike designed primarily for urban use. I find no problem calling both mountain-bike based and roadster-based bikes city bikes. Do we need a new umbrella wikipedia page for city bike that is more general? For the time being I added the term city bike to the first para. --Zachbe (talk) 07:09, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think a separate article for ECB is fine. Historical references by secondary sources (not blogs and posted images) reveal that the mountain-bike derived hybrid city bike evolved in the UK and USA at least ten years before the 'modern' or non-traditional ECB referred to by Mike in Holland, Denmark, and Germany. The hybrid city bike properly belongs in the hybrid bicycle section, while the modernized or lightweight ECB can stay in this article. The only thing the article really needs is more facts referenced by WOP-recognized sources, and fewer conclusory assumptions and unsupported conjecture. Don01 (talk) 14:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If a city bike = urban bike = fixie = mountain bike used in city = roadster = hybrid = comfort bike, there would be insufficient constraints and exclusions to result in a meaningfully focused and delimited article. North America, at least, has barely any discernible conception of what a "city bike" might be. What does it mean to be "designed primarily for urban use"? How to prevent doing like the bad Dutch dictionary, defining so uselessly and off-base, "A city bike is a mountain bike with rack and fenders added"? --MichaelSHoffman (talk) 06:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not about safety advice, but how Europeans use bikes for transportation[edit]

Regarding handlebars, the article correctly and accurately said the following easily proved fact: "The bar's shape allows shopping bags, locks, and other items to be hung from the bars without slipping off." For proof, see: http://www.ski-epic.com/amsterdam_bicycles/

Someone removed that statement not because it was false, but because they recommend that people in Europe ought not to use this technique that they use. American-oriented commentators are overly fixated on safety, until every aspect of cycling, every photograph, comes attached these guardians' warnings about danger, to the exclusion of de facto usage conventions and other considerations. One problem with the supposed safety contributions from the American-type perspective is that the other compensating factors, differences in bike design and usage, are not taken into account, instead incorrectly projecting American-type bike attributes onto Europeans.

Instead of removing the statement of fact, that Europeans hang shopping bags on their handlebars, I added the note about safety. The bar's shape allows shopping bags, locks, and other items to be hung from the bars without slipping off. This reduces steering control, but that is compensated by the more stable geometry of the frame and forks, and by the European convention of riding slower.

This article is not about safety and recommendations of how bikes should be used; the article is about how European bikes are actually in fact configured and used by many people in Europe.

The facts of European bike usage are plainly evidenced in the photographic reports. It might be appropriate to note safety aspects in the article, but it's not appropriate to censor and delete the facts of European bike usage. It says alot about how bikes are designed and used in Europe, that the bikes are so stable, people commonly use a cell phone while riding, which is rarer in America because much more difficult on American-type bikes, which have unstable sports-oriented steering that requires two hands almost all the time.

--MichaelSHoffman (talk) 23:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I sure didn't mean to cause offence. And I don't claim to be an expert on Europe, nor do I think that it's something that needs to be deleted, that's just my preference. It just seemed like an minor, almost irrelevant aspect to handle bar design. After all I see North Americans here carrying things on all sorts of handlebars. But, you know, whatever. If you think it should be there, then I'm fine with that. That said, I have to say, I'm pretty offended that you would call me a "safety nanny" by name, and that I think you read more into my edit summary then was there. --Keithonearth (talk) 04:28, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so if I correctly follow this line of reasoning, Americans were 'sports-drunk' because of their preference for riding dangerously fast on 'twitchy' racing bikes ('racing bike' defined as any bike that's not an ECB), but now we're 'safety nannies' for not using cell phones and hanging bags off the handlebars while riding (very) slow? And only now I find that I was not actually contributing to a English-language wikipedia entry, but a 'European Cultural Study' charged with instructing "ignorant", "insular", "parochial", and "befuddled" Americans about the true proletarian's choice of bicycle, its mandatory features, and its (approved) usage! Mike's continuing diatribe against American habits and culture should be a clue to those who thought electing Obama would satisfy those who have a personal axe to grind against the USA. Wait 'till Mike finds out the new Prez strongly favors product liability lawsuits, strengthened traffic safety regulations, and a revamped Consumer Products Safety Commission with the ability to ban or regulate entire categories of consumer products as 'inherently dangerous'. I wonder if Mike and his "hundreds of students chanting in celebration in the university library" over an American presidential election will still be celebrating when a $1,000 bicycle costs $3,000 and "BUYER ASSUMES ALL RISK OF INJURY" paragraphs are being stamped into every bicycle part leaving the factories? Don (talk) 17:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to understand why people are getting so emotionally involved in this article. --Keithonearth (talk) 04:26, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Overuse of word "heavy"[edit]

There were no less than 10 occurrences of the word "heavy" in the article, entering the realm of non-NPOV. The article is clear and forthcoming with the fact that these bikes are heavier than a racing bike -- there is no need to rush to include the word "heavy" in every possible spot. A few mentions of "heavy", including a discussion, are more than enough. The article should not be centrally and primarily focused or fixated on this one attribute, throughout every section of the article.

-- Mike Hoffman, Dec. 4, 2008

weight bicycles[edit]

In this article is written: A fully outfitted European city bike or heavy utility roadster typically weighs 35–50 pounds (16–23 kg), compared with 14–22 pounds (6–10kg) for the average road racing bike and 22–29 pounds (10–13kg) for the typical modern mountain bike, touring bicycle, or hybrid city bike, commuter, or cross bike.
E.g. only 10-13kg for a touring bicycle sounds too lightweight for me. --Sonty567 (talk) 15:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Europe flat, U.S. hilly, so ECBs are irrelevant"[edit]

"In the United States, where cities and suburbs are located on a variety of terrain, including steep hills, the European city bike is virtually unknown." That implies the overgeneralization that Europe is flat, and America is hilly, as an explanation for why heavy European city bikes are used around Europe but not around the U.S.

In someone's recent additions to the article, there's an overhasty justification for the relevance of heavy city bikes in Europe because it's flat and uniform, while the U.S. is hilly and varied, as an explanation or excuse for why heavy European city bikes are, supposely, ill-suited for the U.S. but make sense for Europe. Europe has a range of variants of the city bike, even though the archetypal extreme is full-featured and heavy.

Europe is just as varied as the U.S., for hills, so the argument of suitability for Europe but not U.S. based on hills and varied terrain doesn't hold up. U.S. cities that lack hills and have bikes include Davis, CA (together with Sacramento and all other cities in the large central valley), and greater Phoenix, AZ. We'd need to compare a range of European cities with a range of U.S. cities and weigh the bikes used in all those cities.

-- Mike Hoffman, Nov. 7, 2008

Also most of Colorado: Fort Collins down through Denver is all flat and easy to ride with a 3 speed. --Jaded-view (talk) 17:54, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This is kind of absurd. Additionally, I don't think this article is really the place to wax poetic about American bicycle tastes, and someone's personal theory as to why we have those tastes. Also, the argument that lighter bikes are better for places with high rates of bike theft and vandalism doesn't completely stand up. Amsterdam has plenty of bike theft, and it's the center of the city bike universe. Zaneselvans (talk) 17:28, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the first place, the sub-text as written contained an overly long and not always comprehensible diatribe on the virtues of the heavy stadsfiets European city bike - as used in the Netherlands and Denmark - over modern 'American' hybrid city bikes derived from modern road and mountain bikes and bike technology (even though simultaneous development of such 'new wave' hybrid bikes also took place in Britain and the Continent). Without reference or source, the article concluded that ignorance was the primary 'reason' why U.S. buyers apparently preferred hybrids to the ECB. Therefore, any tendency of the sub-article to 'wax poetic' regarding Americans' disinclination to purchase a heavy utility ECB is strictly the fault of original author, not subsequent contributors. There are many real reasons (as opposed to insults and messianic editorialising about converting sports drunk or car cult Americans) why a cyclist would not purchase a 40-50 pound utility bicycle as commonly seen in the Netherlands or Denmark, and steep terrain is (only) one of the (referenced) reasons, not only in the USA but in Europe and around the world. One rarely sees the traditional heavy ECB or roadster used for utility purposes in cities, suburbs, and metropolitan areas with high speed commuter routes or steep terrain, and weight, limited gearing, and poor climbing ability are three reasons why this is so, regardless of country. With regard to the ECB in particular, undoubtedly personal tastes and habits of cyclists in various countries play a role, but I see no evidence that such matters can be interpreted as a national character flaw. Prior attempts to import classic utility roadsters into the USA, for example, have met with very little success, which at least dispenses with the 'ignorance' theory. Of course, one can always make a case for 'new' lightweight supposed variants or descendants of the ECB, but the original article made clear its narrow focus on the traditional or slightly contemporized stadsfiets subvariant of the utility bicycle, not newer hybrid designs that demonstrate a clear descent from mountain and road bike designs and technology. Finally, the need for a light and handy bicycle that can be taken on public transportation or portaged up stairs or into office buildings (sometimes via elevator) is a critical one in several countries with particularly virulent cases of senseless vandalism and theft, again not because of speculation or ignorance, but for the reasons cited and referenced. Don01 (talk) 18:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the above claim that "the original article made clear its narrow focus on the traditional or slightly contemporized stadsfiets subvariant of the utility bicycle, not newer hybrid designs". That claim is incorrect and is the opposite of the reality, as proven by seeing the earliest versions of the article. Nowhere did the article focus on "slightly contemporized". The above claim purely reflects the mentality and preconceptions of the above reader, not the article itself. The article began as an effort to prevent that very preconception that incorrectly equates ECBs with only the old-fashioned bikes, by drawing as much attention as possible to the very latest features of the most high-end bikes from the best companies. -- Mike Hoffman, Dec. 5, 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.102.136.132 (talk) 19:07, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original article was focused on the most up-to-date city bikes that are offered by top Dutch brands including Gazelle, Batavus, and Sparta (because those offer a distinctive and interestingly unfamiliar point of reference). The Batavus Adagio NuVinci bike won the European bike-of-the-year award for 2007. It's arbitrary whether these are said to "clearly descend from" traditional utility roadsters or mountain bike and road bike designs; it's better to emphasize that this type of bike has continued to evolve by selecting from among all types of bike technologies. Contemporary ECBs evolved from roadsters, while borrowing from mountain and road bike technologies. Study the full range of Gazelle and Batavus bikes, including the children's models. That shows the variations on a theme, including folding bikes. -- Mike Hoffman, Nov. 12, 2008

The most profitable approach is to explain which subtype of ECB is best suited for various types of cities based on city attributes. Terrain has been overemphasized in the article as an explanation for why ECBs, supposedly, don't make sense in America, although they make sense in Europe.

The article needs to be edited to provide a more balanced and full explanation of bike types vs. environment suitability -- an explanation that can remain standing after considering specific European and American cities. ECBs such as the contemporary stadsfiets are a reasonable choice for some bike use in America, yet they have been unavailable.

In Europe, it is common to see a ECB (old-fashioned or contemporary styled) in places that have high speed cars or hills. Paris was a harsh city for bikes, yet the Velib program has changed the car/bike infrastructure & culture by introducing ECBs.

The webpage about use of bikes in Amsterdam written by a San Francisco cyclist revealed that he was completely unaware of even the concept of folding bikes, or the concept of child seats designed into a bike. His webpage includes reader comments remarking on his ignorance.

Reasons why European city bikes have been compeletely unavailable as an option in bike stores in America could include:

Ignorance, insularity, parochialism, language barrier, the non-existence of Europe in American culture
Exclusive focus on bikes as sports gear, only, by the American bike industry (expos, magazines, & shops)
Terrain
Vandalism
Theft
Bike infrastructure (parking, sharrow reminders, bike lanes)
Car infrastructure (speed limits, legal fault in car vs. bike collisions)
Tradition, culture, style, taste, familiarity, convention, fashion, national character, mental paradigm

Dutch Bike Seattle just opened an additional store, Dutch Bike Chicago. They offer the "Seattle gearing package" (lowering the gearing ratio, for hills). This store's viability calls into question a quick dismissal of ECBs as unsuitable for America. With bike purchases in America, a major reason that transportation cyclists bought a Hybrid or mountain bike rather than a ECB is that none of the shops have ECBs, none of the magazines show them, and the purchaser wasn't even given the information about the existence of that type of bike.

People in America shopping for bikes are completely unaware of, say, the contemporary-styled city bikes made by Gazelle, Batavus, and Sparta -- this ignorance does not amount to the purchaser "choosing" a Hybrid bike "over" such a bike. Many Dutch people own a road bike and an Omafiets and a contemporary fully outfitted city bike. What are the reasons why an American cannot opt to buy a contemporary fully outfitted city bike, and cannot even find out that such a type of bike exists?

Trek tried and didn't manage to sell the L200-type bikes in America, but it does not follow that Americans are informed about the existence of such bikes. The L200 is a typical contemporary-styled Dutch city bike. Batavus didn't manage to sell much through the former U.S. distributor, but that doesn't much represent a considered, informed decision on the part of customers. There are various parties involved in the marketing and distribution chain.

On my previous bike purchase, I certainly would've purchased a contemporary-styled ECB, had I had some way of knowing that such a thing existed. But there is a total information blackout about this type of bike, in America, although we are at the "Electra Amsterdam" stage of awakening.

-- Mike Hoffman, Nov. 11, 2008

I am enjoying this discussion. The bit of the EU that I live in is hilly, and some years back did put in the miles up in Edinburgh in a 3-speed rod-level brake bike from 1950 that weighed 50+ pounds. It was not the weight that I was glad of when I got a newer bike, it was brakes that worked in the wet. Modern ECB do have better brakes, so this is less of an issue. And a 3 speed hub gear system works fairly well, you have options for uphill, flat and downhill, and gears you can change while stationary. Zero maintenance gears.

Could a driver behind the ECB bikes of the post-war era be the relative poverty of the continent after WWII. Unlike North America, Europe couldn't embrace a motorised consumer world in the 1950s, so it retained practical bicycles as commuting/city tools. The US (and to a lesser extent the UK) adopted the bike-as-sports-toy idea, and went for bicycles that were more accessories to a car lifestyle than an alternative? Someone must have done research in this area, things that could be cited. SteveLoughran (talk) 09:01, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did the city bike never die out on the Continent, and continue to evolve, while it became completely forgotten in America? "Bicycles as accessories to a car lifestyle" is apt. Gas was always around $1.90/gal. for me in the U.S., recently hit $4.50/gal. briefly, which shocked Americans and spiked interest in transportation cycling in the U.S., and now is back down to $2.50/gal. but there's an economic crisis. But gas has always been around $10/gal. in Europe, sustaining interest in transportation cycling there.

Low gas prices in the U.S. killed the city bike there, and gave rise to the bike-as-sports-toy paradigm that totally took over the bike industry, despite the fact that students are a main clientelle, and are conceptualizing the bike purely as transportation, not at all as a sports toy, yet buy their bikes from shops that style and position themselves as sports suppliers rather than transportation dealers: shops with telling names such as "Alki Bike and Ski", "Performance Bike", and "Bike Sport" -- emphatically branding themselves as "bike-as-sports-toy" outlets. They are averse to admitting that anyone uses bikes as transportation; that would contradict the marketing strategy they're committed to.

Students are being sold the wrong type of bike by the American bike industry. It is not the case that "American students choose a mountain bike, fixie, or road bike over a city bike"; we are not offered such a choice. This morning I was walking up a steep hill and a blonde girl with buff legs muscled her way up the hill on a mountain bike -- in too high a gear, eventually standing on the pedals -- and then carried her bike up the steps. It was raining, the bike had no fenders, so she had a rain streak on her jeans. She would've been like Copenhagen Style Chic (website), if she had a bike with fenders and easy-to-shift hub gear (especially if the gearing range is lowered).

Students in a region should be fitted with the right sub-type of city bike suitable for that region, where most of the features of a fully outfitted city bike are retained. That is, don't start with a racing bike and add a couple features (the American approach), but rather, start with a contemporary fully-outfitted city bike and then remove a couple features (the European approach). That's the type of "bike fitting" that the bike shops ought to be doing: which type of city bike fits your needs?

I gather that heavy weight is more of a problem regarding lifting the bike than pedalling the bike.

I am concerned that drum brakes, especially front Shimano Roller Brakes, are dangerous in hilly cities, and the rider must ride downhill slow and keep the speed closely controlled, to enable emergency stopping when a car pulls out without even bothering to look first. But Dutch Bike Seattle does sell bikes with front Roller Brakes, with gearing customized for uphill riding, implying that the front Roller Brake is viable in hilly urban areas, to some degree.

-- Mike Hoffman, Nov. 12, 2008

Proposal for sentence deletion (done)[edit]

I propose a group decision on removing this sentence:

"In countries where metropolitan areas and suburbs are often located on or near hills, the traditional all-weather European city bike is virtually unknown."

The sentence implies the argument that the reason European city bikes (e.g. hub gear, chain case, and angled-back handlebars) is unknown in North America is that America has hilly cities and Europe doesn't. The sentence amounts to a hypothesis that is attempting to explain the seemingly total unavailability of European-type city bikes in American bike shops. If this sentence is permitted to remain, then a new section ought to be added, speculating on the various reasons why such bikes have been practically unavailable and unknown in U.S.-type countries.

The discussion in the present webpage makes it clear that the argument is specious and fails to explain what it purports to. If European city bikes are suited for Europe because Europe is flat, then by that same argument, European city bikes are suited for many cities in the U.S., including Sacramento, Davis, Phoenix, and Denver.

The sentence should be removed. It's an incorrect, invalid explanation and argument that doesn't stand up to critique. It's a huge generalization based on comparing one giant diverse country (U.S. or Canada) to another giant geographically diverse area (Europe, comprising many smaller countries). It's a generalization that doesn't hold up as a useful generalization, when scrutinized.

The combination of "often" and "near" hills makes it a confusing, awkward sentence, an arm-waving argument that's trying to patch its glaring holes. The U.S. is a huge country, about which you could say many contradictory things: "Many" cities in the U.S. are hilly. "Many" U.S. cities are flat. Many European cities are hilly. Many European cities are flat. Yet European city bikes are common in Europe, and almost completely unavailable throughout the U.S. Why is that, really? Is it really because many U.S. cities are on "or near" hills? The sentence is logical non-sense and should be removed.

-- Mike Hoffman, Feb. 22, 2009

For example Heidelberg in Germany is quite hilly a and I have seen lots of city bikes there. Morever, apart from one speed or three speed bikes suitable for flat cities like Amsterdam, there are also seven speed bikes which have similar range of speeds as a cross country bike; they are sligtly more expensive then three speed models, but not more expensive then a cheap cross or mountain bike. --Georgius (talk) 14:38, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit done. -- Mike Hoffman, around Sep./Oct. 2009

Lisbon is very hilly, though, many people use bicycle. The hill question is a myth. 145.64.134.245 (talk) 16:27, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm[edit]

As an American who has lived overseas in Europe and Asia, I see our basic bike issue as "Cycling is a Sport" and it that is run by road bike snobs. When I do the 75 mile MS 150 City to Shore in New Jersey, the organizers try to persuade non-road bike cyclists that they really shouldn't ride non-road bikes. Again Road-Bike snobs. To quote the Tour, "New Jersey from the Cherry Hill PATCO station is relatively flat with the major hills being the bridges at the beginning and end of the ride." There is a little old lady who rides every year on a single speed Schwinn and she does it wearing a dress. Every year I see more non-road bikes in the ride. I rode my Kronan 3 speed last year with no problems. During the 2010 ride the first people hit the finish line around 11:30, START TIME was 8 am. They were mad beacuase there was no welcoming committee as the Finish hadn't been set up yet. They demanded recognition and really got mad when they were told this is not a race. --Degen Earthfast (talk) 02:47, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why not simply city-bike?[edit]

I don't understand this definition and the sources to attest it! Why not simply move the article to city-bike? João Pimentel Ferreira 10:38, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Remove picture[edit]

Can I remove this picture?

I like it very much (colourful girl and colourful bike) but the fact that she's driving over the pedestrian crossing, gives an unusual and illegal notion of riding a bicycle. João Pimentel Ferreira 16:47, 5 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joao.pimentel.ferreira (talk • contribs)

This might be of interest; Shared space

You've asked Can I remove this picture? @ 16:47 on 5 October 2015 and you've changed it @ 16:51, 5 October 2015‎! 4 minutes later☹️, Please❗️, anyways, the new pict. looks cool, next time give us a chance to refute if you're gonna ask, cheers! Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 02:14, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

I propose that Roadster (bicycle) be merged into City bicycle. I think that the content in the Roadster (bicycle) article can easily be explained in the context of City bicycle, and the City bicycle article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Roadster (bicycle) will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. João Pimentel Ferreira 22:50, 10 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joao.pimentel.ferreira (talk • contribs)

Right on the beginning the second paragraphs of each article totally overlap. All of the chapters of the Roadster article can be easily merged into the City bicycle, preserving all the content.João Pimentel Ferreira 23:15, 10 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joao.pimentel.ferreira (talk • contribs)

Totally Opposed; City bicycle has nothing to do with a Roadster Bicycle. A Roadster bicycle is of another breed ″that nowadays it adapts to city use″, a roadster bicycle was, in its glory days, not necessarily used in the city but also in the countryside as well as for carrying freight [sort of a pickup truck]. A Roadster bicycle was originally built for multiple uses, as well as racing when it was adapted as a Path Racer. Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 02:38, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here further info about Roadster Bicycle @ Encyclopædia_Britannica/Bicycle, section [913]: Frames.—Fig. 1 represents a road-racer. A full roadster would have the handles a little higher relatively to the saddle, and would be provided with mud-guards.... Let's keep Wikipedia enciclopedic. - Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 03:07, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Really? You don't even realise that you just defined basic features a city bicycle and that the main media of the Roadster article is actually a city bike?João Pimentel Ferreira 01:39, 12 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joao.pimentel.ferreira (talk • contribs)

Opposed - a city bike is designed for city riding while a roadster is designed for road/distance use. Many people use mountain bikes for city riding, at least here in Philadelphia, PA, but that doesn't make them city bikes. Even though these mountain bikes are adapted for city use by changing out the tires (tyres), adding fenders, and lights et al, they are still not city bikes.--Degen Earthfast (talk) 00:47, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What technical features a roadster has that a city-bike has not, and vice-versa? Do you think Wikipedia shall have an article for water and another for dihydrogen monoxide juts because people use them in different occasions?João Pimentel Ferreira 01:44, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Just because water and dihydrogen monoxide are "totally different", it doesn't mean their technical features are different. How can someone logically say that "City bicycle has nothing to do with a Roadster Bicycle"? They are technically the same bike. Forget the name and the countries, look objectively at the specs.; look on the second paragraph of each article that defines such specs. and realise they have the same technical features. You can use city bikes on the road and on the countryside and use road bikes on the city. And? What defines the hardware it's not its use but its technical features. Be objective because you're not! João Pimentel Ferreira 01:29, 12 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joao.pimentel.ferreira (talk • contribs)

Opposed again - Come-on-dude, and with all due respect, ... about the second paragraph you keep mentioning throughout, you've added that description on 20 November 2014 at 20:49 on Roadster Bicycle and then you've added the same description on 21 November 2014 at 10:47 on City bicycle, that second paragraph of each article that defines such specs. was written by you, ...who are you kidding, please, I am a bicycle collector of English bikes and i know what i'm talking about - Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 03:34, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

João Pimentel Ferreira; I will be offline for about 10 days so i'll get back shortly, and please remember to sign your posts by typing four tildes (~ ~ ~ ~). kindly - Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 03:34, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed again
I sign all my comments with four tildes but there is some bug.
Yes, I added such paragraphs, and btw, are they incorrect? If they are, why haven't you changed them? Perhaps because they are correct.
And yet you still haven't given any rational and logical arguments, despite passionate or usage ones, on which technical features a roadster has that a city-bike has not and vice-versa. --João Pimentel Ferreira 22:51, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Oppose

Hey you all, I'm on holidays but here my two bits again anyways!

A "City bike" is a bike that suits well in the city, ditto; ...for that matter a Utility bicycle may well be, and these come in many types!

Here are the following "types" of bicycles well adapted as "City bicycles"=

We can start with the Small wheel bicycle, the Folding bicycle, the Cruiser bicycle (seen a lot in warm climate cities and (beach) towns troughout the US and Latin America), the Freight bicycle, (now popular in Northern Europe not only for carring loads, ...but families too), and then there are the traditional "Dutch style bicycles" aka "European city bike which are desendents of the British roadsters ...and not to mention the hybrids, comforts, porteurs, mtbs, fixies and so on and on.

All these bikes mentioned above are all different "types" of cycles and are or may be adapted to be used as "city bicycles", an article which abruptly morphed with "scant consultation" from European city bike, more closely related to the "Dutch bike fenomenon" this article was all about to begin with, to "City bicycle" 😮, which both may have just "one thing" in common, a front basket and maybe internal gears, that's it!

And furthermore, ok, let me add that depending on region a so called "city bike" may be of a different "species", take for example Chicago, here there's always been a cycle culture, and many so called "English racers", actually "light roadsters" of the 60s have been converted to superb urban commuters, where the typical "Dutch bike" would have problems because of the distances, because Chicago is not a compact city and travel distances are greater!

And the same goes for other cities, Miami Beach for example, never a cycle cult city has adopted the American "beach" cruisers as their favourite mode of healthy "quasi" recreational city cycling option.

So as you see, both of the above examples use totally different cycles with totally different frame geometry ...and I can go on! but let me enjoy my travels!

So in my opinion and for clarity, we cannot generalize what a city bike should be. A Roadster is a "TYPE" of bike - as of many others - well adapted for city usage - Happy cycling to all - Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 00:06, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose a roadster may be similar but is not the same as a city bike and vice versa.--Darrelljon (talk) 12:27, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Opposed - The actual bicycles might be quite similar, in fact a given bicycle might fit into both categories, but culturally they are two different things. Not least because the roadster pattern was a major factor in ending the isolation of villages in Europe, is still common in a non-metropolitan context in Africa, India, China etc. etc. Roadster is basically a historical design. City bike covers all kinds of design from roadsters used for city bikes, to the Boris Bike pattern of bike hire. Absolutely no justification for merging the two articles. ProfDEH (talk) 07:54, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merge[edit]

I propose that Utility bicycle be merged into City bicycle. I think that the content in the Utility bicycle article can easily be explained in the context of City bicycle, and the City bicycle article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Utility bicycle will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. Go to discussion here. João Pimentel Ferreira (talk) 16:10, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on City bicycle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081220111452/http://www.bycyklen.dk/english/thecitybikeandcopenhagen.aspx to http://www.bycyklen.dk/english/thecitybikeandcopenhagen.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:51, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]