Single Speed Cycles

[computer_athlete]

I am looking to buy a single speed bicycle, and have been trying to familiarise myself with as many options as possible.

I came across some beautiful looking bikes at https://singlespeedcycles.com.au/ and I'm wondering if anyone here is familiar with the brand?

I don't know enough to judge the components, but at the very least they're using chromoly and aluminium frames which, as I understand it, is better than high-tensile steel.

There are not many reviews of them on the web though, and I'm very aware that it's easy to be convinced to pay more for something that looks nice.

Are these bikes actually okay? Would it be dumb to purchase this as my first bike? If it would be dumb, what if I immediately booked it into an LBS (I'm in Melbourne — inner north near CBD) for a fitting and/or service? Am I overthinking it?

[Thoglette]

Am I overthinking it?

Probably. For 4km each way just about anything that fits will do.

But my usual recommendations are something with about 32mm tyres (the old 1 1/4") with lights.

Full mudguards are highly recommended for a commuter but that's not the SS look, I know.

Now, to your question: I know nothing about that brand, sorry.

There's worse bikes out there than the Reid Harriers you're looking at, and for now it comes free with lights and a lock. Looks like you could fit some slightly bigger tyres on it (if you keep it that long). BTW, there was a 3-sp Harrier a few years back.

[Gordonhooker]

Am I overthinking it?

Probably. For 4km each way just about anything that fits will do.

But my usual recommendations are something with about 32mm tyres (the old 1 1/4") with lights.

Full mudguards are highly recommended for a commuter but that's not the SS look, I know.

Now, to your question: I know nothing about that brand, sorry.

There's worse bikes out there than the Reid Harriers you're looking at, and for now it comes free with lights and a lock. Looks like you could fit some slightly bigger tyres on it (if you keep it that long). BTW, there was a 3-sp Harrier a few years back.

The Harrier 3 is still available and on special at the moment for $399 not a bad spec for the price with a Sturmey Archer 3 speed rear hub.
Worth a look that is for sure.
My single speed daily run around is a 2012 Avanti Solo 1 and it is as light as a feather. I had coastie brake rear wheel made for it from the USA when the exchange rate was a lot better.

[Gordonhooker]

I am looking to buy a single speed bicycle, and have been trying to familiarise myself with as many options as possible.

I came across some beautiful looking bikes at https://singlespeedcycles.com.au/ and I'm wondering if anyone here is familiar with the brand?

I don't know enough to judge the components, but at the very least they're using chromoly and aluminium frames which, as I understand it, is better than high-tensile steel.

There are not many reviews of them on the web though, and I'm very aware that it's easy to be convinced to pay more for something that looks nice.

Are these bikes actually okay? Would it be dumb to purchase this as my first bike? If it would be dumb, what if I immediately booked it into an LBS (I'm in Melbourne — inner north near CBD) for a fitting and/or service? Am I overthinking it?

The Berlin is pretty much the same specification as the Reid Harrier 1 or 2 - I had the Reid Harrier when they first came out and they were great for running around the city.

[computer_athlete]

Am I overthinking it?

Probably. For 4km each way just about anything that fits will do.

But my usual recommendations are something with about 32mm tyres (the old 1 1/4") with lights.

Full mudguards are highly recommended for a commuter but that's not the SS look, I know.

Now, to your question: I know nothing about that brand, sorry.

There's worse bikes out there than the Reid Harriers you're looking at, and for now it comes free with lights and a lock. Looks like you could fit some slightly bigger tyres on it (if you keep it that long). BTW, there was a 3-sp Harrier a few years back.

Thanks, that's really helpful!

I'm just starting to read a couple of books about bikes, so no doubt this will be covered, but what's the benefit of the thicker (I assume that's the way in which they're larger?) tyres? Just more stability for a novice (or roads covered in tram tracks) or something like that?

I'm also not opposed to mudguards — in fact I think I want them! With that said, can things like mudguards and panniers (pannier racks?) be fitted to all or most bikes, or do they require special affordances to be attached? In other words, if I can buy one of these bikes and attach panniers and mudguards I think I will, but can I?

[computer_athlete]

Am I overthinking it?

Probably. For 4km each way just about anything that fits will do.

But my usual recommendations are something with about 32mm tyres (the old 1 1/4") with lights.

Full mudguards are highly recommended for a commuter but that's not the SS look, I know.

Now, to your question: I know nothing about that brand, sorry.

There's worse bikes out there than the Reid Harriers you're looking at, and for now it comes free with lights and a lock. Looks like you could fit some slightly bigger tyres on it (if you keep it that long). BTW, there was a 3-sp Harrier a few years back.

The Harrier 3 is still available and on special at the moment for $399 not a bad spec for the price with a Sturmey Archer 3 speed rear hub.
Worth a look that is for sure.
My single speed daily run around is a 2012 Avanti Solo 1 and it is as light as a feather. I had coastie brake rear wheel made for it from the USA when the exchange rate was a lot better.

Thanks, I'm starting to feel better about my options. Except, oops, I think I want one of each now.

Since you're impressed (relatively speaking) with the Harrier 3 (and that was also on my list, though I figured I'd get the single speed for starters, and an IGH for slighly more adventurous rides later) are there any disadvantages to having an IGH like this over a single speed beyond the (I presume small) increases in weight, complexity, and potential points of failure?

I guess if they're different enough I could maybe justify getting the H3 and one of the nice looking single speeds... Oh, I see. This is how it starts, isn't it?

Edit: Apparently I should avoid emoji.

[computer_athlete]

(In fact it's the Avanti Inc 1 and 2 that I really like the look of for an upgrade down the road.)

[Thoglette]

I'm just starting to read a couple of books about bikes, so no doubt this will be covered, but what's the benefit of the thicker (I assume that's the way in which they're larger?) tyres? Just more stability for a novice (or roads covered in tram tracks) or something like that?

All other things being equal, lower (than traditional) pressures provide better grip and more comfort.

...or do they require special affordances to be attached?

Preferably the frame and fork has eyelets (usually threaded) for mudguards and fenders but there's plenty of work-arounds.

I'm out of time (got a flight to catch)so you'll need to use your favourite search engine but also spend some time reading Sheldon Brown, Grant Petersen and Jan Heine. For a completely different view read some Path Less Pedaled or Lovely Bicycle (off knitting these days).

If that's all too nice, dig up some Pistadex snarkiness from BSNYC

[Gordonhooker]

Probably. For 4km each way just about anything that fits will do.

But my usual recommendations are something with about 32mm tyres (the old 1 1/4") with lights.

Full mudguards are highly recommended for a commuter but that's not the SS look, I know.

Now, to your question: I know nothing about that brand, sorry.

There's worse bikes out there than the Reid Harriers you're looking at, and for now it comes free with lights and a lock. Looks like you could fit some slightly bigger tyres on it (if you keep it that long). BTW, there was a 3-sp Harrier a few years back.

The Harrier 3 is still available and on special at the moment for $399 not a bad spec for the price with a Sturmey Archer 3 speed rear hub.
Worth a look that is for sure.
My single speed daily run around is a 2012 Avanti Solo 1 and it is as light as a feather. I had coastie brake rear wheel made for it from the USA when the exchange rate was a lot better.

Thanks, I'm starting to feel better about my options. Except, oops, I think I want one of each now.

Since you're impressed (relatively speaking) with the Harrier 3 (and that was also on my list, though I figured I'd get the single speed for starters, and an IGH for slighly more adventurous rides later) are there any disadvantages to having an IGH like this over a single speed beyond the (I presume small) increases in weight, complexity, and potential points of failure?

I guess if they're different enough I could maybe justify getting the H3 and one of the nice looking single speeds... Oh, I see. This is how it starts, isn't it?

Edit: Apparently I should avoid emoji.

-
I prefer a IGH because there is less maintenance and the 3 speed is fine around town and where you want a little more speed and you have some hills that are not too extreme.

As I got older going on 70 I had my mountain bike converted to an ebike with the racks and panniers for my shopping trips and trail rides. I no longer have an internal hub bike (space constraints) and as I said earlier I kept the Avanti Solo 1 for local running around and fun because it is a fun bike to ride.

[computer_athlete]

I'm just starting to read a couple of books about bikes, so no doubt this will be covered, but what's the benefit of the thicker (I assume that's the way in which they're larger?) tyres? Just more stability for a novice (or roads covered in tram tracks) or something like that?

All other things being equal, lower (than traditional) pressures provide better grip and more comfort.

...or do they require special affordances to be attached?

Preferably the frame and fork has eyelets (usually threaded) for mudguards and fenders but there's plenty of work-arounds.

I'm out of time (got a flight to catch)so you'll need to use your favourite search engine but also spend some time reading Sheldon Brown, Grant Petersen and Jan Heine. For a completely different view read some Path Less Pedaled or Lovely Bicycle (off knitting these days).

If that's all too nice, dig up some Pistadex snarkiness from BSNYC

Thanks for the recommendations!

[computer_athlete]

I prefer a IGH because there is less maintenance and the 3 speed is fine around town and where you want a little more speed and you have some hills that are not too extreme.

As I got older going on 70 I had my mountain bike converted to an ebike with the racks and panniers for my shopping trips and trail rides. I no longer have an internal hub bike (space constraints) and as I said earlier I kept the Avanti Solo 1 for local running around and fun because it is a fun bike to ride.

Forgive me if I’m parsing you incorrectly, but are you saying IGH bikes are less maintenance even than single speeds? I’m definitely keen on them since they’re simpler than bikes with derailleurs but I figured single speeds would be simpler still.

Either way, I’m pleased that both the single speeds and IGHs seem like viable options and I appreciate the clarity on the ride differences; I’m so unlikely to be tackling hills in the initial stages of my riding that anything more than an IGH at this stage seems like unnecessary complication. Thanks!

[Gordonhooker]

I prefer a IGH because there is less maintenance and the 3 speed is fine around town and where you want a little more speed and you have some hills that are not too extreme.

As I got older going on 70 I had my mountain bike converted to an ebike with the racks and panniers for my shopping trips and trail rides. I no longer have an internal hub bike (space constraints) and as I said earlier I kept the Avanti Solo 1 for local running around and fun because it is a fun bike to ride.

Forgive me if I’m parsing you incorrectly, but are you saying IGH bikes are less maintenance even than single speeds? I’m definitely keen on them since they’re simpler than bikes with derailleurs but I figured single speeds would be simpler still.

Either way, I’m pleased that both the single speeds and IGHs seem like viable options and I appreciate the clarity on the ride differences; I’m so unlikely to be tackling hills in the initial stages of my riding that anything more than an IGH at this stage seems like unnecessary complication. Thanks!

-
You are not parsing me correctly IGH are on par with single speed bikes, they are less maintenance than derailleur typed multi geared bikes in my humble opinion.

[computer_athlete]

So clearly I’m still in the decision-making mode since I keep changing my mind every five minutes, but current thinking is as follows:

- Get the Harrier 3 from Reid now. Its downsides are clear, and in a way that’s a blessing for me, a novice: I know what to expect from it in a way that I won’t if I get a second-hand bike. But the upsides are also clear and will allow me to ride a little further than if I just got a single speed.
- Get a cheap single speed from Gumtree or Facebook. This would allow me to start learning about the differences between bikes; I can compare components that are right in front of me, compare how the rides feel, adjust and experiment, etc.

Kind of a best of both worlds approach?

However, what I really *want* to do is get the Harrier 3 and *also* get one of the pretty Single Speed Cycles, as per this thread’s initial theme. I may have already asked as much, but would that be really silly or exceptionally wasteful or redundant? Pretty as they are, there’s not much point buying a second bike for ~$400 if I’m always going to find myself using the other one because it’s a better ride.

Lol, it just occurred to me that I could actually end up with three bikes at the end of all this. And that’s just in the first month.

You are not parsing me correctly IGH are on par with single speed bikes, they are less maintenance than derailleur typed multi geared bikes in my humble opinion.

Brill, thanks.

[Gordonhooker]

No problem - just remember the best bike is the one you are riding at the time...

[computer_athlete]

No problem - just remember the best bike is the one you are riding at the time...

It sure was! For a few minutes at least...

Figured I'd give an update now that I've bought something.

So I bit the bullet a few days ago and ordered the Harrier 2.0 — single speed — from my local Reid shop.

(Actually, I first ordered the Harrier 3.0 — three-speed internal gear hub — until I suddenly had the realisation that where I thought that the two bikes shared a frame, in fact the 3.0 is steel and only the 2.0 is chromoly. So, since I plan to buy a nicer IGH bike after I save up anyway, I figured I'd just get the one with the lighter frame for now. So I emailed them and they kindly changed my order to the 2.0.)

Fast forward to today and I picked up the bike. I asked the salesperson if they had any opinions on what components, if any, I should upgrade first. "You know, no one's ever asked me that," they told me. (Surely that can't be true!?)

Anyway they were very friendly and said I should get new tyres. They got the seat into a good position and sent me on my way.

Fifteen minutes into my ride home and I noticed the left pedal felt a bit wonky. A minute or two later and it flopped around then stopped working altogether. Not sure what happened, but when I took a look the crank was poking out of the bike at a strange angle, such that the left pedal will no longer turn a full revolution.

So it looks like I might have some early tinkering to do! Earlier than I'd hoped, though!

I'll wait to hear back from the bike shop first, but hopefully this is not some kind of part failing, and rather just an issue with how it's been put together, and, therefore, something I can fix myself. I'd rather not have to walk it back to the bike shop.