Is front suspension a good thing, in terms of a city commute?

oxygen

Hey. Im finalising my choice for a good city bike for a twice daily 3 mile commute. Hueston to out past town, so its all city cycling.

Do ye think front suspension is a good thing on bikes?

Two arguments I've heard:

Mountain bikers I know dont like front suspension, but that’s mountain biking. But also a guy from the office was telling me, when your cycling up a hill on a bike with front suspension, its alot more difficult because your pushing down into the suspension, wasting energy. Does that makes sense? Theres a tough old hill I'd need to go up every day, the one that the red luas lines goes from just after hueston out to Tallaght.

I really like hybrids, I fly on them, but I am a little bit worried about are the narrow 7cm wheels getting wreaked without suspension, getting on or off curbs etc.

Tenzor07

Bad thing in that its not required at all...

Cheaper suspension forks will weigh around the 5lb+ mark and not be very effective anyways...

Use the free inbuilt suspension in your arms instead!

seamus

You don't need suspension to ride in the city. Just avoid riding into potholes and big bumps on the ground. Lift yourself up off the saddle when going over bumps and use your arms and legs as suspension.

Bikes which come without suspension are built with this in mind, and have wheels that are more than strong enough to cope with everyday riding. If you buy a bike with front suspension, you will get cheaper wheels that will die more quickly (unless the bike costs over €1,000). If you're going up a kerb, then either bunnyhop it or go slowly enough that it's not a big bang on your back wheel. Hammering up and down kerbs will destroy your wheels, regardless of size or suspension.

Yes, suspension does suck energy out of your riding, not just on hills but any time that you put the boot down, like taking off from lights, overtaking, etc.


On a side note, it's not legal to ride up/down Steven's Lane except for access. If only to avoid getting the way of a tram, I would recommend an alternate route - perhaps up Watling st?

carthoris

And don't cycle on and off kerbs - there should not be any need for it.

hardCopy

carthoris wrote: »

And don't cycle on and off kerbs - there should not be any need for it.

+1

If you stay off the path there should be no need for kerb hopping.

oxygen

Thanks for the replies guys. I guess it seems really unanimous then that front suspension is more of a hindrance than a help. I am really surprised, but will accept your better knowledge in this area

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Use the free inbuilt suspension in your arms instead!

Urgh, that suspension kills my shoulders tho :P

seamus wrote: »

On a side note, it's not legal to ride up/down Steven's Lane except for access. If only to avoid getting the way of a tram, I would recommend an alternate route - perhaps up Watling st?

Point taken, I will have a look at that, Walting street brings me back onto the Christchurch a bit further than the lane I go into the housing area on, but I will see if I can change the route.

carthoris wrote: »

And don't cycle on and off kerbs - there should not be any need for it.

It’s unavoidable. To cross from one cycle lane, to a cycle lane across the street, I need to cut across an island in the middle of a two lane traffic separated by crossing lights. Of course there will always be a need to mount curbs, legally.

Can I get yere opinion on these bikes then? I had decided on the second one, it was a bit more expensive, but had front suspension. But if this is not beneficial at all then, I might be better off looking for a slightly more expensive bike with no front suspension and decent wheels on it?

Below is the price with the corporate discount of %15 applied.

Bike1: No front or rear suspension. Weight is 12.1kg.
Cube Hyde Bike 2012 €550.38 12.1kg
http://www.cyclesuperstore.ie/shop/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=32&idproduct=47727


Bike2: Front suspension. Weight is 12.3kg.
Cube Nature Pro Bike 2012 €769.12 12.3kg
http://www.cyclesuperstore.ie/shop/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=32&idproduct=48140

steamsey

I can think of many good reasons why I would not bother with suspension on a city bike but not one good reason why I would have them.

They are just not needed for city cycling but the main reason for me is they cost extra €€€ to get serviced (a decent pair of suspension forks would cost €120+ for their annual service - and annual servicing is the absolute bare minimum required to keep forks in good shape). If you don't get them serviced - they will go to sh*t in no time.

You'll also need a special pump for the forks (can cost about €40) to check the air pressure and make sure that it's right for your weight and riding requirements. So it's more € and more maintenance for very little extra benefit on the road.

The issue of energy drain from the suspension forks moving up and down when you are cycling is all but eliminated with a lock out on the forks that make them pretty rigid. I have a good full suspension mountain bike and with the suspensions locked out - there is almost no power drain - it boots off from the lights from standstill and climbs like a hardtail. With that said, lower end forks will might not have a (good) lock out.

You mentioned that mountain bikers you know don't like front suspension? Is this correct? If so, I'm very surprised. You cannot effectively go downhill without front suspension. I mean - you can descend gingerly but it's no fun and quite sore on the wrists. If you visit any of the mountain bike trails in Ireland - you will see that 99.99% of the bikes have at least front suspension. I have only seen 1 person ever attempt the downhill parts of Three Rock on a fully rigid bike - and he was not doing very well to say the least.

tomasrojo

seamus wrote: »

On a side note, it's not legal to ride up/down Steven's Lane except for access. If only to avoid getting the way of a tram, I would recommend an alternate route - perhaps up Watling st?

Well, it's not legal to cycle on the cobbled bit at the bottom. You could always wheel past this and then cycle up the hill, which is legal.

If you see a Luas coming behind you, there's a dipped kerb opposite St. Pat's where you can pull in to let the Luas past. I got a nice wave from a Luas driver last week when I did this.

oxygen

steamsey wrote: »

I can think of many good reasons why I would not bother with suspension on a city bike but not one good reason why I would have them.

They are just not needed for city cycling but the main reason for me is they cost extra €€€ to get serviced (a decent pair of suspension forks would cost €120+ for their annual service - and annual servicing is the absolute bare minimum required to keep forks in good shape). If you don't get them serviced - they will go to sh*t in no time.

You'll also need a special pump for the forks (can cost about €40) to check the air pressure and make sure that it's right for your weight and riding requirements. So it's more € and more maintenance for very little extra benefit on the road.

The issue of energy drain from the suspension forks moving up and down when you are cycling is all but eliminated with a lock out on the forks that make them pretty rigid. I have a good full suspension mountain bike and with the suspensions locked out - there is almost no power drain - it boots off from the lights from standstill and climbs like a hardtail. With that said, lower end forks will might not have a (good) lock out.

You mentioned that mountain bikers you know don't like front suspension? Is this correct? If so, I'm very surprised. You cannot effectively go downhill without front suspension. I mean - you can descend gingerly but it's no fun and quite sore on the wrists. If you visit any of the mountain bike trails in Ireland - you will see that 99.99% of the bikes have at least front suspension. I have only seen 1 person ever attempt the downhill parts of Three Rock on a fully rigid bike - and he was not doing very well to say the least.

Cheers for above, the cost of servicing suspensions is one thing I did not think of.

Sorry, my bad RE the mountain bikers, I must have mis quoted them if this is the case. They were probably talking about suspension in terms of a city commute then.

Satanta

I'd take a look at this:

http://www.cyclesuperstore.ie/shop/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=38&idproduct=48629

It's lighter than the ones you are looking at and right in your price range.

Review here: http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/hybrid/product/review-giant-rapid-3-10-37899/

Lumen

oxygen_temp wrote: »

It’s unavoidable. To cross from one cycle lane, to a cycle lane across the street, I need to cut across an island in the middle of a two lane traffic separated by crossing lights. Of course there will always be a need to mount curbs, legally.

I don't want to drag your "what bike" thread off topic, but strongly disagree with your assertion that kerb hopping is "unavoidable".

It clearly is not unavoidable since cars don't do it and a mounted bike can go wherever cars can go (with the exception of motorways which don't have kerbs) and a dismounted cyclist can walk pretty much wherever pedestrians can walk.

Perhaps by "unavoidable" you mean "convenient".

Kintarō Hattori

OP I got myself a nice Cube mountain bike for my commute to work. The suspension is left locked out all the time. Not having it on makes cycling on road a fair bit easier.

oxygen

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

OP I got myself a nice Cube mountain bike for my commute to work. The suspension is left locked out all the time. Not having it on makes cycling on road a fair bit easier.

The cube bikes look nice all right. If its locked out all the time, you would recommend buying one without the suspension then?

k123456

Hi If you don't use the suspension v often, (locked out), do the forks need to be serviced less often, or do they need to be serviced annuly, even if they get little use

Thanks

steamsey wrote: »

I can think of many good reasons why I would not bother with suspension on a city bike but not one good reason why I would have them.

They are just not needed for city cycling but the main reason for me is they cost extra €€€ to get serviced (a decent pair of suspension forks would cost €120+ for their annual service - and annual servicing is the absolute bare minimum required to keep forks in good shape). If you don't get them serviced - they will go to sh*t in no time.

You'll also need a special pump for the forks (can cost about €40) to check the air pressure and make sure that it's right for your weight and riding requirements. So it's more € and more maintenance for very little extra benefit on the road.

The issue of energy drain from the suspension forks moving up and down when you are cycling is all but eliminated with a lock out on the forks that make them pretty rigid. I have a good full suspension mountain bike and with the suspensions locked out - there is almost no power drain - it boots off from the lights from standstill and climbs like a hardtail. With that said, lower end forks will might not have a (good) lock out.

You mentioned that mountain bikers you know don't like front suspension? Is this correct? If so, I'm very surprised. You cannot effectively go downhill without front suspension. I mean - you can descend gingerly but it's no fun and quite sore on the wrists. If you visit any of the mountain bike trails in Ireland - you will see that 99.99% of the bikes have at least front suspension. I have only seen 1 person ever attempt the downhill parts of Three Rock on a fully rigid bike - and he was not doing very well to say the least.

seamus

k123456 wrote: »

Hi If you don't use the suspension v often, (locked out), do the forks need to be serviced less often, or do they need to be serviced annuly, even if they get little use

Thanks

You should probably get them done annually. Locked out, they're susceptible to other issues like seizing or rusting.

smacl

oxygen_temp wrote: »

The cube bikes look nice all right. If its locked out all the time, you would recommend buying one without the suspension then?

If the suspension is always locked out, you neither need nor want it in the first place. I've a hybrid similar to the cube with lockable front suspension, bought at the time with no knowledge of bikes, and it is a grand bike albeit heavier than it needs to be. The suspensions stays locked about 90%-95% of the time, but can be nice to have on unpaved bohereens and forest tracks. If I was to buy a similar bike again, I'd go for something lighter without the suspension. For cities, or any paved surfaces, suspension is simply not needed.

Would agree with what's been said already. For getting around I use a hybrid that has suspension forks (I got it off my dad, swapped it for my old road bike). Asides from the unnecessary weight and complexity, I find the way in which they bob up and down when I get out of the saddle very annoying. Of course better suspension forks have lockout but if you're using that you may as well have rigid forks.

As for curb hopping, it's been pointed out that it's avoidable but even if it isn't it can still be done. There are some shortcuts I take that require some curb hopping and even the road bike with its carbon forks can cope no problem. Just bend the elbows, shift your weight back and let the front wheel down gently.

Icyseanfitz

i dont how anyone could survive the urban jungle without spensions op there not needed at all unless your mtbing, and even then some mtbers dont use them.

as for the lad saying you need to spend at least 1000 to get a mtb with half decent wheels gtfo plenty of good deals out there to be found

cdaly_

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Use the free inbuilt suspension in your arms instead!

oxygen_temp wrote: »

Urgh, that suspension kills my shoulders tho :P

Keep your elbows bent as you ride and your arms will absorb the shocks. Your shoulders are getting killed because you have your elbows locked straight so any shocks travel up your arms to your shoulders. Takes a bit of effort to get used to the bent elbow position but over time it ends up more comfortable.

Icyseanfitz

people dont bend their elbows on their bikes well thats a sure fire way of fcuking your elbows and knees up pretty quick

reallyunique

Suspension doesn't use up enough energy to make climbing a hill much more difficult (being unfit is the biggest problem) and it's not heavy enough to make a big difference either (being fat and carrying two big locks is more of an issue) but it doesn't help muchon big potholes either. The maintenance issues are real and you're paying for stuff that's pointless. If you're looking for a more plush ride then get higher volume tyres, they'll soak up the little bumps better than a cheap suspension fork and still be lighter and more efficient. Really though, bend your elbows.

Don't go up on kerbs! Remember that a bike is exactly the same as a car (except slower with no engine or bodywork or bumpers or seat belts or air bags or suspension, tax, insurance etc but otherwise absolutely identical, apart from the fact that car drivers and pedestrians realise it's not a car and treat you accordingly).

That said, you can hop over obstacles with no suspension (see Danny Macaskill), pull up on the bars to get the front wheel over and jump a bit to lighten the back-end. That should do it

Kintarō Hattori

oxygen_temp wrote: »

The cube bikes look nice all right. If its locked out all the time, you would recommend buying one without the suspension then?

If you've no intention of taking the bike off road or through rough roads then yes you won't need the suspension.

blorg

Even locked out a good suspension fork will still have noticeably more give than a rigid fork. Utterly unnecessary, and annoying, for city riding. I imagine the MTB guys were saying it was unnecessary for the road as almost everyone uses suspension off-road where it does have a major benefit. It is a pain in the neck cycling a MTB to the trails though.

Paparazzo

Go without.
If you haven't cycled in a while, for the first week you'll wish you had front and back suspension, but after that first week, you'll be well into it and be glad you didn't.