I have a co-worker who is alive because he was wearing a helmet and that on the second bounce it was the opposite side of the first. He was hit by a person who made an illegal left hand turn.

I do not wear any pads, but I do have a mirror mounted to my helmet. Handlebar mounted mirrors bounce around too much IMO. I do wear bike gloves which help reduce vibration to the wrists.

When I am riding, it's 7 to 20 miles. I do the MS150 (a 150mile, two day ride between Duluth and Minneapolis to support the MS society)every year and I try to get as many miles in as soon as weather allows in the spring.

I ride a road bike, so less comfortable, but faster.

I will take your advice as far as always wearing a helmet. I ordered mine online , it should be delivered on Monday.
I ordered a mirror too, but the handlebar type.

Cheers!!!

... the bike you bought is an attractive bike from an eclectic, retro vintage, pretty paint job point of view; but I have to ask... Is there a reason that you didn't opt for a bike with a few more gears? Is one speed really going to be enough for you?... (It is a one speed, isn't it?)

I live in a rural farming community and use my mountain bike almost daily; winters included. I use it to ride to the post office, to the local little store, to friends' houses in the neighborhood, to the cemetery at sunset... to the canal in the summer months for irrigation purposes, the canyon foothills for arrow head hunting or plinking cans on the outskirts of town...

I have two bikes that I bought brand new; an old 1984 Fuji Del Rey Special Edition road bike with Shimano components, and a 1990 Shogun Prairie Breaker mountain bike with Shimano Deore XT throughout. The mountain bike is my main source of transportation outside of my car. It's like an extension of my body and it provides me with a feeling of freedom that I can't imagine living without. I wouldn't mind owning a newer bike with more gears but my 21 speed mountain bike is still in great shape and gets me where I need to go. The 18 speed Fuji touring bike remains, for the most part, in storage.

The point of this meandering soliloquy is that I rely heavily on the ability to shift gears, up or down, while getting around on my bike. I'm just wondering if trading in your new cruiser and replacing it with an 18, 21 or 27 speed bike with fat tires and a comfortable touring seat might not be a better idea for you, and one to consider.

I have a bike helmet and always wear it in an urban setting but rarely in the country. No mirror but not a bad idea. Lights for night riding are also a very good idea but for now, I don't have them.

I'm actually a fan of helmets. I laid down one of my motorcycles (Kawasaki Ninja) while wearing a helmet and lived to tell about it. There was a big chunk of the helmet missing where the helmet hit the asphalt. Safety gear is always a good idea.

I think your bike purchase is a wonderful idea and I'm happy for you. I just think that you might not stick with riding once you begin to realize the limitations of a one speed bicycle.

Please understand that I'm not trying to discourage you about your new bike. I'm actually very happy for you. The best bike to own is the one you're riding.

TYY

The only ones I rode until now were stationary ones at the gym.
I hope to, eventually, get a better one, but so farvi enjoy my new bike tremendously.
I do plan on getting a mountain bike next, a more sturdy and sophisticated one. This one came in parts I had to assembly myself. Even the saddle had to be put together. Cheap bike, but it does the job.

Thank you for your reply!
X

They're good looking bikes and I know you'll enjoy having it.

I was only worried about any slight incline. I know I rely heavily on having gears to shift down into on even the smallest uphill grade. I just thought, if it wasn't too late, that you might still be able to get a bike with a few gears. I know I wouldn't ride my bike nearly so much if I couldn't shift gears when headed uphill. You're probably younger and stronger than I am.

Anyway, enjoy your new bike. I'm happy for you. As I said, the best bike is the one you're riding.

Many happy trails.

TYY

And I love it too much to wait for weeks. I would rather buy a new bike, after I figure out what I want/need.
Can I ask you a question about gears? Ive never owned a bike with gears. What do they do to the bike when going uphill?? and how would you use it? I didn't get one with gears because I didn't know how they work

... and keep pedaling without coming to a complete stop. If you don't have gears to shift down to, you won't be able to pedal uphill for very long. The steeper the hill, the harder it will become to keep the pedals moving, unless you have gears to shift down to.



Basically, if you're going uphill and it's getting too hard to pedal, you'll want to start shifting the gears down. If you start going downhill again, the pedals will start spinning too fast and you'll want to gradually shift the chain back up to bigger sprockets. As you shift the gears down to smaller sprockets, the strength required from you to keep pedaling uphill remains the same. The bike will be going slower but you'll still be able to pedal.

As you shift down while pedaling uphill, the gear shifter switches the chain to the next smaller sprocket. If it's a steep hill, you'll gradually shift through all of the available smaller sprockets to keep your bike moving. Once you reach level ground again, or even slightly downhill, you'll gradually shift the gears back up to bigger sprockets The bigger sprockets will make it so that your pedals don't go so fast that you can't keep up. The bigger the sprocket, the faster your bike will go on level ground or downhill.

You don't need a 27 speed bike for the kind of riding you'll be doing but more gears is definitely better.

I realize my explanation of gears is repetitive. Hopefully it makes sense. The words "speeds" and "gears" mean the same thing. If you have a 10 speed bike, you have 10 gears on your bike.

One option for you might be to look for a good used mountain bike in the classifieds. That's probably my next move.

TYY

When you are buying a Huffy, which is what Darkangel purchased, you are at the low end of the bicycle market. I remember my teens years, when I was in the low end of the bicycle market and purchased a "Ten speed". It was a high tension steel frame bike, but it had 10 speeds. The problem was I found it was better to use the ten speed to find what gear I liked the most and just stay in that gear. If you shifted gears, it may shift sometime before you had to get off and walked OR found that you needed to undo what you just did.

When I purchased my Cannondale, it was in the 1990 and all I purchased was the Frame. Cannondale in the 1990s had a program that for $300 dollars you could trade in your old frame for a new Cannondale Frame. It was more cost efficient than buying a new Cannondale, so that is what I did. Installed the old junk gearing on the brand new Cannondale frame and started to save money.

When I had enough money I installed Shimano XT components, I heard they were good and wanted to try them out. The first thing I noticed was the gears actually CHANGED when you shifted gears. That NEVER occurred with the previous junk components. Thus for the first time in riding "Ten speeds" I could actually shift gears and the bike would shift gears before I had to dismount. It was AMAZING.

On the low end, entry level bikes that has NOT changed that much. i.e. the components are still crap. Thus Darkangel is better off with a single speed for as a general rule single speeds are set for the most common gear one would use if you actually could shift gears.

Thus if you are spending less then $400 dollars for a bike, go with a single speed, at about $300 for a bike, you start to get into components that actually work. You do not need XT level, any of the Shimano Levels advertise on their USA web cite should be sufficient, but Shimano makes a lot of other components, many of questionable usability. Thus a bike purchased in a Department stores with Shimano Components, may be a good bike or may be a piece of crap. A good test would be are the components the ones advertised on Shimano's USA Web Site? If yes, go with the bike, if no look for something better.

My advice for someone like Dark Angel is to ride what she has for about a year and then upgrade to something better. There are a lot of teenagers who would like a bike, and that is what I would do with the Huffy (but she may also want to keep it back as a secondary bike, it is an option). After about a year, look into Trek made in USA low end models. Trek bikes made in China are NOT up to Trek made in USA bikes, but all of them are upgradable by replacing whatever components is on the bike with newer and better components.

Giant and Cannondale both have good reputation for bikes made in Taiwan (Cannondale were made in the USA, but that is no longer the case) and would be a good choice, but I tend to want to preserve American jobs so I support American made bikes whenever possible,

Just a comment that darkangel seems to wanted to keep her outlay low and if that was the case a single speed bicycle that actually fits her is a good choice. In many ways a better choice then a multi Speed bicycle, till she gets use to biking. When she upgrades she then should look at a multi-speed bicycle.

Last edited Sun Dec 7, 2014, 01:58 AM - Edit history (1)

I had a brother in law who rode a motorcycle hit a retread on the road, lost control of his bike and died for he rode without a helmet. I had a similar accident, but because I had a helmet I walked away.

Your head is the most sensitive part of your body. During WWI, a French General was talking to his men and found one man putting his mess kit under his cap, when asked the soldier told the General, the Soldier put his mess kit in his helmet to provide additional protection from head injury. Subsequent studies showed that the Soldier was right, a helmet prevented serious head injury, thus by the middle of WWI every country had given their soldiers helmets. During the building of the Hoover dam in the 1930s, the men, many of them WWI Vets, started to put things in their caps for the same reason it was done in WWI, to reduce the injury caused when things hit their head,. Such protection was cheap AND effective. This lead to today's practice (Adopted doing WWII) of providing and requiring workers in areas where objects fall to wear such helmets. This started the movement to require helmets where head injuries can be expected.

Head injuries can be fatal, and in many cases hard to treat, thus helmets preventing such injuries is the best way to protect yourself. As to other forms of protections in accidents, your body can take a lot of abuse but as long as the brain is working you will generally come out OK. BY OK I do NOT mean 100% but well enough to get to be taken to a hospital for treatment IF the injuries require any treatment (Most bicycle accidents result in scratches and other minor injuries that can be treated at home, broken bones and internal bleeding are possible, but those are best treated at a hospital). If you are wearing a helmet and are in a Serious accident, you have a 99% chance of surviving the accident if you are NOT wearing a helmet, the rates are much lower.

The other ways to protect your body do NOT provide the improvement in protection a helmet does. Knee pads prevent skin breaks, but so does wears pants (Through to a lesser degree). If you do fall and hit your knee, the pad will provide some protection, but if you hit the knee to a level that causes more damage then skin abrasions, the Knee Pad will NOT provide that much more protection. Normal clothing (unless for some reason you think "Normal Clothing" Includes string bikinis) are generally all the protection you need when biking.

Bicycle helmets started in the 1960s for the same reasons. Head injuries can kill. Helmets are the best way to avoid them. Most head injuries are rarely the fault of the cyclist, but you are on two wheel going a good pace, so often you end up in a situation that you have no control over before you even see the problem with the road. The Helmet prevents serious injuries when such accidents occur.

Now, there is a debate as to Helmet, there are three positions:

1. No Mandatory Helmets, for the benefits of biking outweighs stopping people from biking if there do not have a helmet. Helmets use should be encouraged, but not required.

2. Mandatory Helmets, even if it means banning people who do not have helmets from biking. Head injuries lead to tremendous injuries and occurs often enough when riding a bike to make wearing a helmet mandatory (and such helmets are CHEAP).

http://www.bhsi.org/negativs.htm

3. People who like full face helmets.

40% of all head injuries are to the jaws. Conventional bike helmets do NOT prevent such injures, but full face do. On the other hand the injuries that KILL are injuries to the brain and a conventional helmet provides almost all the the protection needed to protect the brain. It is the BRAIN that needs protection not the head. Thus a conventional helmet is sufficient (and this is from a person who DOES use a full face helmet).

Full face helmets have some draw backs. First during winter it forces breath onto one's glasses fogging them up in cold weather. Second there are expensive when compared to conventional helmets. Third, there are tighter fit on the head. Thus it is rare for someone to wear a full face helmet, it is marginal additional protect compared to regular helmets. I switch between the two all the time for various reasons but I have NOT had an accident where the helmet was a factor.

Snell

Under Federal Consumer Protection Safety Law, the Federal Safety Protection Commission (CPSC) will NOT set safety standards if a private group is already doing so. Snell was such a private group whose job covered Helmets. There had an excellent reputation for providing such Standards (and still do). This law was passed by Congress to make sure the CPSC did NOT issue regulations when safety standards were already adequate and done by a non-profit group like SNELL.

Now, Snell had one requirement that makers of helmet objected to. Snell insisted of actually TESTING helmets NOT just setting standards. Bike helmet makers objected to this and managed to get the Federal Consumer Protection Commission (CPSC) to issue there own regulations that did NOT include independent testing (The law forbidding such regulations were ignored). Most Helmet makers only follow the Federal Specs (all helmet makers MUST meet those specs) but SOME still apply for a SNELL approval. The SNELL standards were considered superior to the Federal Regulations when the Federal Standards were issued (and today SNELL has made its standards to be the same or superior to those Federal Standards where the two Standards differed).

More on SNELL:

http://www.smf.org/

All of their Standards:

http://www.smf.org/stds

The SNELL Bicycle Standards:

http://www.smf.org/standards/b/b95std

The key is seeing the SNELL label on the Helmet. The Helmet should have a Label saying it meets the Federal Specs (Such Specs are issued by the Consumer Protection Safety Commission, or CPSC). A SNELL Label would be a rarely seen Label on a biocycle helmet today, the CPSC should always be seen.

Helmets with SNELL labels tend to be high end helmets, but a high price does NOT mean it is superior to a cheap helmet. The CPSC tracked the previous SNELL standards EXCEPT for the requirement of actual testing (SNELL test helmets, bought off the shelf NOT what makers supply them whenever it is possible). Thus any Helmet with a CPSC is as good as the next one when it comes to safety even if one is just $10 and the other $100 in price. Price has NOTHING to do with HOW the helmet protects you, the high price ones protects you no better then the cheapest helmets with meet CPSC specs.

The SNELL Label only means SNELL has done independent testing on that helmet. SNELL tries to do all testing with off the Shelf, but when it comes to helmets new on the market it will test one supplied to it by the helmet maker. I like the idea of independent testing, but I admit I do NOT have a SNELL Helmet at the present time.

List of SNELL Approved Helmets

http://www.smf.org/cert

Three makers of FULL FACE Bike Helmets have SNELL Labels.

Only Two Makers of all other Bicycle Helmets seek SNELL Labels.

If you can get a helmet with a SNELL Label, but given the above numbers it is HARD to find one, today there are HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of Helmet makers and only FIVE seek a SNELL Label.

I ordered my helmet on Amazon, together with the elbow/knee pads and the mirror. They will all arrive tomorrow.
I will hold off on riding till I get them, I fully understand wearing a helmet can mean the difference between life and death.

Thank you for your responce, I trully appreciate it.

Last edited Mon Dec 15, 2014, 05:52 PM - Edit history (1)

Yes, people do ride without a helmet, but the damage to one's head by a wearing a helmet is so huge it is well worth the effort.

On the other hand, people will rationalize anything. Helmets have been known to save lives since the 1920s, people who actually study such accidents overwhelming endorse the use of helmets.

I often tell people, young children follow their parents and other adults more then their peers (people claim the opposite but peer pressure is NOT as strong as people claim). Thus when young people see people wearing helmets, it shows them helmets should be worn.

Yes, the opposite is also true, when people see people without helmets, that shows that people can go without helmets. My position is I want to be a POSITIVE influence on others, so I wear a helmet.

5 miles each day each way. Rode two Centuries (100 mile bike rides) this year--one in June and another in August. Got my eye on a couple for next year as well. I don't say any of this to brag or because I think I'm a badass, because let me tell you how it all began.

In 2008, I started bike commuting in fair weather only, and it was 2 miles each way on flat ground. Today my commute has a couple of gradual hills, but one serious uphill climb in the afternoon coming home. For probably 6 weeks, when I started commuting, my thighs were killing me. About 4 weeks in, I had to reduce the number of days a week I rode.

In 2012, I started riding with the local bike club. First ride was about 10 to 12 miles. Overall pretty flat, and I thought I was going to die. It was all I could do to keep up. I was 45 at the time, and the only person I finished the ride ahead of was the 70 something year old woman with a bad knee, replaced hip, and cancer in remission. But I kept coming back. I found that riding in a group, I could push myself a lot further.

I always wear a helmet, without exception. The couple of times I jumped on my bike to ride down the street without the helmet, it felt just beyond weird.

I don't have any pads, but even in the summer I wear gloves that cover my fingers. I reason that if I take a spill, particularly something small, fingers are more susceptible to nicks and cuts so gloves that cover the fingers are good protection. I also have a yellow cycling jacket. In addition to making me visible, I took a spill about 2 years ago and slid some 6 or 8 feet. I was bruised and sore, but sliding on the jacket allowed me to slide without ripping my flesh apart. The jacket also remained very much intact and didn't rip apart. In fact, earlier this year ago I did a sewing repair on the elastic in the waist.

I have a helmet mounted mirror, and I love it. I think it's a great piece of safety gear.

My primary protection gear this days is polypro, lobster gloves, Bar Mitts, balaclava, fleece face mask, and lots of lights.

I do need gloves. I could barely move my fingers after I was done yesterday.
Do you stop and do any type of exercises with your hands/fingers after a certain amount of miles?

As you can tell, I'm a newbie, but so glad I came back to biking. I did ride my bike in high school, but back them we didn't wear a helmet or any other kind of gear.

Cheers!!

On my first long ride in 2012, about 36 miles, my hands were going numb at around 25 miles. One hand on the bars, other hand off to bend and flex and stretch. Mostly I try to flex my wrists and move my fingers as much as possible. On the Century I rode this past August, at about 85 miles, my hands were going numb. Over time, your body will tell your mind you can do more. Cycling is largely mental, not physical.

If I try to, I wobble all over the place.
Cycling is amazing, but so addictive. Hopefully I won't overdo it, because the other day I had a hard time putting the bike down.

In most states a BELL is mandatory in a bicycle, a cheap $5 to $10 one is sufficient. A bell comes into play when you are overcoming someone slower then you, it is a nice way to tell them you are passing on their left.

A Mirror gives you an idea of what is behind you, thus I have one on my bike.

You should also look into a light. Many states requires A HEADLIGHT if you bike after nightfall. YES a HEADLIGHT NOT A TAILLIGHT, for studies have shown a HEADLIGHT on a bicycle prevents way more accidents then a tail light. People think in terms of what happens most often, given cars pass bikes all the time they think the most common form of Bike-Auto accident is a auto hitting a bike from the rear and thus a Tail light would prevent that. The problem is given the bike and auto are going the same direction, the speed difference between the two is a lot less then people think. Given this reduce speed difference, most auto drivers have more then enough time to see a cyclist ahead of them to avoid hitting the cyclists, even if it is after night fall AND the cycle has NO Tail light.'

On the other hand, the second and third most common form of Fatal auto-bike accident are often preventable if the cyclist had a HEADLIGHT (The most common form of Fatal accident, a park car opening his car door in front of a cyclists is best prevented by riding at least a car door length from any parked car).

The Second most common Auto-Bike Accident is when a cyclist is biking along a road and a car pull out of a side street as that automobile is turning left. The car enters the intersection and while turning left runs over the cyclist and later claim he did not see the bike for they was no headlight. The third most common fatal accident is a variation of the Second, but here the Automobile is coming in the opposite direction of the Cyclist but makes a left turn onto a side street, again right over the cyclist. The lack of a headlight often contributes to these two types of accidents, thus the requirement of a HEADLIGHT if a bike is used at night (But no requirement for a taillight).

If you do NOT go out at night on the bike, no light is needed.

One more comment, find out who is you local bike shop. Sooner or later the bike will need repairs and you will have to get the repairs done in that shop. Most have a limited supply of mirrors, bells and lights (You may be better off using on line stores for these items) but when it comes to actual repairs, such shops are the place to go. Go to the shop and look what they have. If asked tell them you have a cruiser, they may NOT sell any, but they do know how to get parts for them and to repair them. They often have mirrors, lights and Bells, but generally the most popular (and remember one of the reason such items are popular is that they WORK).

As to headlights, right now I would go with a lithium rechargeable battery light. The one I am using at present can be charged using any USB port. The actual light I am using has a "Mini-USB" port, but came with a cable whose other end was a standard USB, so I can plug the light into my computer to be charged OR use the USB re-charger that came with my phone and use a regular house plug (The Light did NOT come with such a re-charger but most people have them today).

Such lights can project light for 6-9 hours before they need to be re-charged. I do some serious night bike ride and found that I needed more then a couple hours of light and these Lithium LED lights provide the light over a long period of time:

I was biking BEFORE LED headlights came out, and in the days of incandescent headlights, the batteries had a hard time providing light for more then one and half hours. To have light for a longer time period I ended up installing a Generator on my bike so I could have light for Three to Four Hours. With the LEDs you do NOT need to have a Generator to have lights for more then one hour. Thus I recommend LED lights with Lithium Batteries. Rechargeable lights with Lithium batteries are the most cost effective lighting system today.

As to Lights that uses Removable Batteries. Most Removable Batteries are tradition Lead Acid Batteries. The electrical power in them drop off drastically as the temperatures drop below 60 degrees. This is NOT true of Lithium batteries, they retain most of their electrical power even in sub freezing weather. Thus a lot of old warnings about a drop in electrical power in batteries do NOT apply to Lithium Batteries. Thus if you decides to opt for a light that uses removable batteries, stay with Lithium batteries. Such lights have one huge advantage, you can buy batteries almost every where if you need new batteries (unlike rechargeable lights that require a charge every so often). Such removable rechargeable batteries tend to cost AND less light power when compared to non removable rechargeable batteries, but the fact you can buy batteries for them almost any place can be a huge advantage if you are on a long trip.

Now, one thing I did install my bike that you did not mention was Fenders. Fenders keep most (but not all) dirt and water off your back AND out of gears. There cost about $50, but make sure they are at least 1/2 inch wider then the tire on your bike (1/4 inch on each side of the tire). It looks like all of Huffy's Cruisers come with Fenders, thus you need to make sure any replacement tires are the same size as the tires that came with the bike OR smaller.

http://www.huffybikes.com/products/womens/cruiser/

Last edited Sun Dec 7, 2014, 02:27 PM - Edit history (1)

The bike came with a bad rear tire, so I had to change the tire yesterday at the bike shop, before I was able to ride it. There was a xmass parade blocking me from accessing the bike shop ( road closed, and bunch of cops around) Finally I was able to cross in between, and get the tire fixed. They didn't have any black/white tires ( my bike is green pistachio with white) so my rear tire is completely black with green rims.
It is working, and I'm so grateful, but I will never purchase anotejt bike online. Putting it together is a pain, I had to buy all sorts of screwdrivers and other stuff I can't even remember ( got them from Harbour Freight). I don't have the front fender installed, because the nut and bolt for it didn't come in the package.

So far I'm out and riding, and it feels wonderful!!

Last edited Wed Dec 10, 2014, 08:40 PM - Edit history (1)

Huffy is a good bike, but even when it was made in the USA it was considered low end. Today, only high end bikes are made in the USA. They are expensive, but in many ways worth it, ONCE YOU HAVE SOME TIME BIKING. Someone just starting to bike, will NOT see the advantages of those high end bikes, but once you have biked for a while you will see their advantages.

My advice is Bike and talk to other bikers. Look what you would like in a bike, discuss it here on DU, we all have opinions, some good, some bad, some idiotical, but the only way to tell the difference is to discuss the options.

I can make certain assumptions about you (while remembering the old saying about assume. i.e it makes an "ass" out of U and Me). First, it is mostly women who use the term "Angel", thus it is one of my assumptions. Many women get into biking not fully understanding that most bikes are designed for men AND the so call "Women" bikes were design for riding in a skirt not for women riding a bike.

The main problem for women and biking is that women have a different location of their center of gravity then men. Muscle weighs four times the same volume as fat and men have most of their muscle in their upper body, and thus their center of gravity is in the middle of their chest.

Women have the largest single muscle in the Human Body, the muscle to give birth. For this reason that muscle is the center of gravity of a woman. Breasts are made up of light weight fat, and the head is made up of even lighter weight neurons (Protected by a heavy brain case).

For a man, when he is on a conventional bike his center of gravity is right between the seat the the handlebars, he can become one with the bike. Women on a conventional bike (including a "Woman's bike&quot has her center of gravity hanging out on the seat, to keep her center of gravity close to the bike's center of gravity she has to sit more upright. This can be difficult for smaller women (under 5'6&quot for the wheels of the bike require the bike to be to LONG for a woman to sit upright. This is NOT a problem for short men for their center of gravity is still between the seat the the handlebars, but it is a problem for short women, they dislike having their center of gravity hanging out over the seat.

Terry, a female engineer, has been working on this for about 20 years. She has a line of expensive made for women bikes. Expensive as compared to a Huffy. On the other hand many women like them for their are design for women. One thing Terry did was shorten the frame, but to do that she had to go to two different size wheels on her bikes. A 26 inch wheel in the rear and a 24 inch wheel in the front. This difference in sizes permitted a shorter frame that permitted shorter women to sit more upward.

http://www.terrybicycles.com/?gclid=CjwKEAiA-5-kBRDylPG5096R8mASJABqEdm4rVsHOomBWQ_iVNHK4t392FqnfDrViWPUrsLlPFb4TxoCILjw_wcB

Now, Terry started with her Saddles for Women. Split Saddles have been used for Centuries on horses, Terry adopted it for women's (and later Men's) saddles. It is a HUGE improvement over previous saddles (with the exception of the Brook's and other Leather bicycle Saddles).

Her bikes are NOT cheap ($3000 and up) and until you are up to that level of biking NOT WORTH IT. On the other hand, Terry has a lot of accessories that many woman have found ideal for themselves so look at what she has. I just do NOT see anyone moving from a Huffy to a Terry, you will probably buy something in between first, but look at her stuff to get an idea of what the "Ideal" bike for women should be,

Terry's Bicycles:

http://georgenaterry.com/

Terry has her bike made by Waterford Bicycle. Waterford Bicycle started out as the Schwinn Paramount division, just before Schwinn went bankrupt in the early 1990s. The makers of the Paramount and one Schwinn heir purchased the plant and started to make Waterford Bicycles. They can NOT use the Schwinn name for that is now owned by the same company that owns the name for Paramount (and recently purchased Cannondale). Huffy, Schwinns and Cannondales are now all made in Taiwan by the same bicycle maker. Terry and Waterford are CUSTOM bicycle makers and are independent from the owners of the present name of Huffy, Schwinn and Cannondale and each other. Terry just has Waterford make her bikes to her specs.

http://waterfordbikes.com/w/

Now, Terry has had a huge influence not only in the high end bicycle market but also in the medium end of the market (through not much on the lower end, i.e. not at the level of Huffy, but some influence on Schwinn and Cannondale).

I bring up Terry as the premium woman bicycle maker. She use to sell a bike for around $850, which was cheap for her and in many ways a very good bike. I suspect she "dropped" it for it is WINTER and people do not think of bicycles till the spring.

Now, I check on my previous comments about woman bicycle and found that I did have a reference and it still works for Terry's Commuter, the Burlington, but on her more up to date site Terry says she is only making three bicycles and it is NOT named. I suspect I ended up on a custom only site of hers but she still is selling the Burlington:

http://www.terrybicycles.com/Bicycles/Ready-To-Ride-Commuter/Burlington



Now, I again mention that you need to ride for a while to see what you can do AND what you need. I suspect at least six month of riding and perferably ride for a year, then look at upgrading.

http://community.terrybicycles.com/wordpress/?_ga=1.6324795.820870758.1418254202#.VIjdgNLF-So

One more comment. Given women's geometry (I am male and I like seeing women's geometry) you may want to look into recumbent bicycle. Recumbents have several advantages:

1. They are superior on level ground and down hill.
2. A woman's center of gravity is below her when she is in a recumbent.

Recumbents have several disadvantages:

1. They are inferior going up hill and in most cases going up hill the the biggest obstruction to biking NOT going on level ground or going down hill,

2. If the recumbent has small wheels, the smaller wheels provide more road resistance that harder to peddle. This is NOT a problem with a recumbent with large conventional wheels, but then you have the problem of what to do when you come to a stop. It is NOT as easy to put your leg out to rest on when riding a recumbent then on a conventional bike.

3. Being lower to the ground, harder for drivers of automobiles to see (and this appears to be the main reason recumbents are banned in Europe).

Please note when Recumbents were introduced in the 1930s, one entered the Tour de France. That recumbent did great except on hills but had a hard time "tracking" conventional bikes. Such "Tracking" is done by bicycle teams in such events all the time, to give the team member designated by the team as the winner of that race the most time behind another team member. Thus the other team members act as win breaks for the designated rider so in the final push for the finish the designated rider is as fresh as he can be given he or she has traveled the whole race. The Recumbent thus did NOT win that bike race and Recumbents were banned from the Tour de France and other bike races afterward, mostly do to the fear that sooner or later the recumbent's superiority on level terrain will win the race. This is why recumbents were banned from racing, but the general European opposition to recumbents seems to be related to safety not racing. Please note Recumbents are NOT banned in Europe, but there is much more opposition to them in Europe then in the US.



http://www.bentrideronline.com/?tag=easy-racers

Now, do I ride a Recumbent? No, I stay with a Conventional bicycle. Do I buy a Waterford? No, I stay with a 20 year old Cannondale, which is more of a one step up from the Huffy then the bikes I mention above.

On the other hand, look at these bikes. Dismiss them as to expensive but then see WHY people are willing to pay for them and see if you can get what you need in a more inexpensive bike. Cannondale and Giant still have a reputation for being good bicycles (Schwinn was own by someone who just wanted to cash in the the name and did, so when the present owners obtain Schwinn's name there are having a rough time upgrading it to Cannondale or Giant Levels).

Trek makes several good bicycles and right now the premium American mass producer of Bicycles. They are heavy into Carbon Fiber right now for their top end bikes. Their lower level bikes are made in China, but they higer end are made in the USA. If you do upgrade it is your best choice to upgrade to.

http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/

One last assumption. You use the term "Dark" which is generally used by people who prefer dark clothing. Since you just bought your bike, it does not look like you are in the Snow Belt (I am, and still riding my bicycle, but no one calls me sane). Thus I suspect you are biking. If you are wearing dark clothing, not a problem in most of the US at this time of year, but it is a problem some summer.

White reflects all light, Black absorbs all light. Everything else being equal, you will be cooler wearing white then black. When I was in the Army we were issued the then new BDU uniforms which had large patches of black. In the summer these patches just absorb the heat from the sun and we roasted in them. The army then issued us some "Hot Weather" BDUs, These were MUCH better then the regular BDU for their were thinner and made of 100% rip stop cotton, thus much cooler then the thicker 50% cotton, 50% Polyester (called 50/50 BDUs) of regular BDUs. On the other hand I purchased some 50/50 BDU that were 100% Tan/Khaki. These 50/50 TAN BDUs were almost as cool as the 100% Rip stop Cotton BDUs (though NOT as cool as 100% Ripstop Cotton that were also 100% Tan).

The reason for the Tan BDUs being cooler then the Regular issued BDUs was there were no Black to absorb all the rays from the Sun. During Desert Storm (which occurred AFTER I left the Service) the problem of BDUs and they colors came back even in regards to the 100% Ripstop cotton. Thus in the 1990s the US Army switch their Desert BDUs from a version that had black patches in the mix, to one without those black patches. This solved much of the problems with the BDUs when it came to the Iraq war of 2002. Later in that decade the Army came out with a new "Hot Weather" Uniform that used the colors of the later Desert BDUs but went back to 50/50 cotton/polyester material, though of a thinner grade then in regular Desert BDUs. replacing the last of the 100% Ripstop Cotton hot weather uniforms.

The Army claims the new 50/50 hot weather uniform is better then the old 100% Ripstop Cotton uniform. In one way it is better. The Army expects the new 50/50 hot weather uniform to last 18 months of hard use. The original 50/50 BDU was expected to last three years. The 18 months is do to the material being much thinner then the regular BDUs. The 100% ripstop cotton is still much cooler to wear than the 50/50 hot weather BDUs, for Cotton is the best material to absorb sweat. The main problem with 100% Ripstop is uniforms made up of that material would last about 3 months of heavy use. Cotton is a weak material compared to Polyester.

Thus in one way the new Hot Weather 50/50 BDUs are better, they will last a long longer then the 100% Ripstop Cotton uniforms, but you end up with a hotter uniform but one that seems cool enough for general issue.

In the summer I still use 100% Ripstop Cotton BDUs pants but ones that are 100% Tan/Khaki in color. The reason is simple the Color is an important factor when it comes to staying COOL but so is the material. I am willing to accept the fact that 100% ripstop cotton is weaker then 50/50 material, but since I do NOT plan to do any combat in the next few years, it is a excellent choice for biking.

Side Note #1: The US Army is converting from BDU uniforms to a newer "Army Combat Uniform" of ACU. The big difference is the patches used in the older BDUs are replaced by "digital pattern" camouflage. The material used in the uniform did not change. There are other changes, the bottom pockets of the "Jacket" (the shirt) were eliminated for under body armor they were useless (When I was in the Service, in hot weather I just wore a T-Shirt so I had BDU Jackets long after the pants were done), a small pocket was added to the bottom leg of the pants and the buttons on the hip pockets were replaced by Velcro (and I read recently the Army is going back to Buttons in that location, Velcro needs two hands to open, you could button and unbutton those buttons with one hand).

Side Note #2: Ripstop Cotton was developed during Vietnam. In Ripstop Cotton, every 1/4 inch runs a one thread of NYLON among the cotton threads. If you look closely at the uniforms you could see the 1/4 inch squares made by these threads of Nylon. The theory was if the cotton would start to tear (remember cotton is a weak fabric) the tear would STOP at these threads of Nylon. Thus the name Ripstop. To a degree this works quite well. The thin Cotton used in Ripstop Cotton left the soldier with a cooler uniform then any other material, all other things kept the same. The down side was it still was a weak uniform given the thinness of the Cotton and its inherent weakness (Jeans make up for this weakness of cotton by being very thick, but that thickness permits massive absorption of sweat or other form of water making such jeans heavy thus disliked in hot humid areas, to avoid this problem Ripstop cotton is a very thin material, not enough material to absorb to much water or sweat).

I bring this up for you use the term "Dark Angel" and I do recommend you do NOT wear black in hot weather. You will be able to bike a lot longer and it will be a more enjoyable ride if you are wearing light color clothing. The Army liked Khaki for decades for this reason (White was to hard to keep clean, Khaki was a nice compromise between hiding stains that would show up in white material AND the reflection of sunlight white provides).

I would recommend 100% Ripstop cotton, but it is hard to find AND remember it does NOT last that long when compared to other materials. Some people wear thin nylon clothing instead of Cotton. Nylon does NOT absorb water or sweat (its biggest disadvantage when compared to Cotton) but can be made quite thin, so sweat can be released to the Atmosphere as your ride. Many people like thin nylon in hot weather for that reason.

Stay away from Polyester in hot weather. Nylon is a thin flat material thus provides NO insulation. Polyester is a round material around a hole in the middle. That hole can and does provide Insulation capacity. In winter such insulation is something to want, but in summer something to avoid.

http://www.microlabgallery.com/ClothingFiberFile.aspx

I bring this up for I have seen to many people wearing Black and then complaining they were to hot. Your use of the term "Dark" puts me on edge for it sounds like you want to bike, but wearing BLACK in SUMMER can be a killer of that desire. In winter you may want to wear black, to absorb all the sunlight (and heat) you can, but in summer black is something to avoid.

I think I over did it this weekend. I could barely move Monday morning..
Even 5 miles seems to be a lot for me. Everything hurt, not just my legs. My biceps/triceps, abs, everything.. I am just now getting back to normal. I really should have taken it slowly. My mistake.

Last edited Thu Dec 11, 2014, 01:42 AM - Edit history (1)

Thus I do recommend you get on that bike again and do it again. You may want to do something shorter but five miles (if on relatively flat ground) is a good start.

Now, I live in the mountains of Pennsylvania. A five mile trip requires some hill climbing no matter where I go. Five miles of up and down biking is a lot harder then 20 miles on a rails to trails. The main reason for that is the rails to trails are generally limited to 3% Grade (3 feet up for every 100 feet you go). Look into the rails to trails in your area, they are a lot easier to bike then on the road.

I point this out for roads even in relatively flat Florida are going to be more up and down then any of the old Rail lines that are now being converted to Rails to Trails. The reason for this is simple, the old rail lines HAD to be very strict as to level, the old Steam locomotives were quite picky about level roads so the railroads made an effort to keep them as flat as possible.

On the other hand Roads are design by State Highway Departments for Tractor Trailers and Tractor Trailers having rubber tires and modern diesel engines can operate on road beds that would wreck an old Steam Locomotive. Thus the Rails to Trails tend to be smoother and flatter then roads even in areas that are generally considered "Flat" such as Florida. Thus if you can go with a Rails to Trails for a start.

Commuting by bicycle:

I also want you to think about commuter by bicycle. Not now, you do not appear ready to commute but think about it. Commuting has a huge advantage over any other type of "recreational" biking, it is something you do BEFORE you get home at night.

When people arrived home, they want to relax (also called "Rest" which is something more then just sleeping). They do NOT really want to go out, you are geared to go home, eat a light dinner and then "REST" for the rest of the day. Thus exercising during the week is a CHORE you end up doing in a time period you want to relax. Those two thoughts quickly come into conflict and you end up NOT exercising for your need to relax at night is to strong.

On the other hand, if you commute by bike, you are heading HOME when you are exercising. You are heading for rest - not interrupting your rest with a need to exercise. This is the best way to bike, make your exercise and commute one and the same. Yes, this will make your commute LONGER, but by combining them you preserve more of the time you need to rest at home.

Yes, you will also have to commute to work and thus have to start earlier, but rarely is that time part of your time to Relax.

Now, one of the problem with modern US Society is most people live to far from their work to walk or bike to work. Prior the the 1950s most people WALKED to their work. The Second largest group took the Streetcar and then walked to work. Only a small minority drove cars prior to the 1950s (The driving of cars increased tremendously during the late 1940s, but walking was still the dominant form of transportation at that time period).

Since the 1940s walking to work has steady declined. Biking to work was NEVER big in the US, increased in recent years, but still less then 1/2 of the people who walk to work (Both are less then 2% of the population nowadays). Driving is the main way people get to and from work today.

That being the case it may be impossible for you to commute by bike, most jobs are to far from where most people live to permit commuting by bicycle (and the road system is often NOT design for cars and bikes to mix on the way to where people work). On the other hand it is something you need to look into. It is a way to combine two activities into one, i.e. commuting to work AND exercising. It is the best way to exercise for it is doing exercise in a way that does NOT conflict with your need to relax and rest at the end of the day.

I commute by bike, but it is only a 3 mile ride and downhill to my work (uphill to my home, I do live in the mountains). In flatter areas people often bike 10-20 miles to and from work.

Now, people ask me if I get sweaty what I do? While I carry a spare t-shirt with me and other clothes to change into. Three mile trip downhill is NOT that long, but on longer trips I do change my t-Shirt (on 20 miles trips through the Conemaugh River Gorge, I switch to a dry T-Shirt 1/2 way through, it feels so good to get out of a sweaty T-Shirt and into a dry one, even if it is 20 degrees outside). It is generally cool in the morning so sweat does not work up that much on a short ride.

Thus you may want to look into places where you could change clothes. In a pinch I have used the handicap stalls in restrooms, when no one else was using that stall. It is NOT illegal for anyone else to use them, the law only says if someone who needs it enters, they have first use.

If you can find a private place like a bathroom stall or an office, do a complete change of clothing. You may not need to do a complete change if you did not sweat that much, but if you did you may want to do so. You know your body better than anyone and your local climate (both weather wise AND the Social Climate where your work) and see what you have to do (and given many social climates, commuting by bike may be out).

Just a comment that you should look into commuting by bike. You will have to look what roads you would take, where you could change clothes AND where you could store your bike. You are riding a Huffy so it is NOT to high on most thieves list of bikes but Huffys are still stolen by people who do not know any better, thus you should lock it up OR otherwise secure it.

Side note: If you can find a place to store your bike, remember the U-Lock is still the best lock to get. It is heavy, but they is no law that says you have to take it with you. Many Cyclists who commute by bike, leave their U-locks where they lock up their bike during the day. In the morning they ride to work, go to where the U-lock is and use their key to lock up their bike. At night they unlock the U-lock, lock it back up and leave it behind, ready for use the next day. Thus all they need is the key to U-lock.

I had a sister who had a 20 year old Schwinn that she would ride to and from work. She left it out, unlocked and no one touched it. She did this for years. She then purchased a new Cannondale and insisted on taking it into her office every day. The Cannondale was something someone would steal so she secured it by taking it into her office.

Just some thoughts that you need to review with yourself. You probably NOT up to bike commuting at the present time, but I mention it just to show you it is possible and if it is possible for you (a slightly different position) you should look into it to see if it is really possible or more hope then reality.

I do have a bike chain I purchased off Amazon, it has a combination lock built in it. I doubt anyone still my bike, but you never know
My bike is great so far. FL has been cold for the last few days , in the 50s and 40s, but I still rode it. My helmet, pads and mirror arrived. No headlight yet, but I don't ride it after dark.
Do I need to buy any lube for the chain? I'm going back to the bike shop next week to install the fender which I couldn't install due to lack of nuts and bolts.
( and good idea about having an extra shirt with me on the trail :p )

The bike store should have some oil. In most cases any oil will do, it is more to protect the links as they connect and disconnect to both the front and rear gears. The better oils will do a better job then the cheap stuff, but your Huffy has a wide chain compare to the chains in bikes with multiple gears and thus can take a lot more abuse then those thinner chains.

The better grades of oil do a better job for they often have extras in them, that keep the oil in the chain longer AND provide additional lubrication for the parts. The oil sold by your local bike store should be sufficient.

Oil once in a month should be sufficient. All that is needed is a light coat, and then more on the GEARS then the chain itself (Each will provide oil to the other as you peddle). When I oil I oil the chain and the gears and anything else the chain interact with (such as a derailleur on multiple gear bikes).

Hopefully you put some sort of lube on the Bottom Bracket (What the Peddle revolve around when you peddle) and the front stem (Which turns with the front wheel). These are all movable parts of the bike and should have some lubrication. If installed with Lubrication, that lubrication should last for years but after a year of hard riding you may want to have someone look at those parts along with the chain.

Remember anything that moves will wear out, That includes the Wheels and the Tires, but also the bottom bracket, but except for the chain, these items will take years to wear out thus do NOT worry about them but do get them check out every couple of years (Every year not needed, but recommended).

It's been so cold here lately, I haven't been riding much.
It's suppose to warm up today-tomorrow, so maybe I will make it to the trail.
I realized I don't like riding with other people. I like being by myself, it's almost a meditative state. One of my neighbors was on the trail and insisted to ride next to me last time. SO annoying.
I'm definitely a "bike hermit", if that term even exists.

It is the one huge advantage of using generator lights. As I wrote elsewhere such generator lights were by far the best 20 years ago in the days of Incandescent lights, but with recent advances in LED Battery light that advantage no longer exists (20 years ago if you wanted to ride at night for more then two hours, you had to carry extra batteries, use a generator OR ride in the dark). LED headlight started to change that in the late 1990s early 2000s, but given that people using generators where willing to pay more for lights, LEDS for generator systems were better till about five years ago, when the Battery LED lights finally caught up with the Generator LED Lights.

Today, the main advantage of high end generators is you can run them even in daylight AND not have to worry if you charged them recently. I have been using Schmidt SON generators and lights since the early 1990s and since I have them on my bike today, I still use them. The SON lasts a long time but I did wear one out after ten years of heavy usage. When I replaced that light, the LED head lights for Generators were much more expensive then other headlights (2 to 3 times as expensive just for the lights, the Generator was extra) but also much brighter and effective. That is NO longer true, you can get LED battery lights that are brighter then generator lights AND last 8 to 9 hours. Those two requirements older battery lights could NOT match (mostly the minimum requirement fo 8 hours of lighting, generators can provide light as long as you peddle).

Thus I presently have a light on even in daylight, but most time such lights are not needed during daylihgt.

Had the Titanic been built with it, the Titanic would have survived. It is an easy steel to work with and repair. It also is NOT a rigid frame and thus the frame can absorb as much as 70% of your peddling power.

The more rigid the frame, the easier it is to Peddle. In order of Rigidly, material used in bicycle from (from least rigid to most rigid) are:

1. High Tension Steel
2. Chrome-Moly Steel, the wonder material of the 1930s
3 Aluminum, for bike frames the wonder Material of the 1980s
4. Titanium, for bike frames the wonder material of the 1990s
5. Carbon Fiber, for bike frame the wonder material of today.

The big jump in rigid frames is from High Tension Steel to Chrome-Moly Frames. The other materials are just marginally more rigid and in my opinion generally NOT worth the extra cost (And I ride an Aluminum Cannondate from the early 1990s). If you are racing, the extra cost may be worth it, but if you are doing causal biking Chrome Moly and Aluminum are your best bet for the price. Titanium and Carbon Fiber are extremely rigid AND expensive thus unless you see yourself in the Tour de France (and that is an all male race) not worth it.

Aluminum became the bike frame of choice starting in the 1980s for Cannondale figure out a way to make an Aluminum frame that when it broke could be cheaply and easily repair (prior to Cannondale Aluminum frames, if they broke anywhere, had to be junked, that was NOT true of High Tension Steel or Chrome Moly Steel).

After Cannondale determined how to make Aluminum frame that were repairable it made Aluminum the frame of choice, even through Chrome Moly was still winning the Tour de France. Thus in theory Aluminium and the other material are better then Chrome Moly, the difference is more theoretical then real. Aluminum bikes are NOT that much more expensive then Chrome Moly and for the reason such bikes are an good alternative to Chrome Moly. Aluminum bicycle are easier to find in medium price bikes then Chrome Moly for they have a good following given the last 20 years of marketing.

On the other hand the difference between High Tension Steel and Chrome Moly is easy to see once you see them together. I once saw my brother coast by my sisters on his Chrome Moly Frame Bike, while they were peddling hard on their High Tension Steel Bikes. The difference was NOT male vs female it was Chrome Moly vs High Tension steel frames. I left my brother behind, when I had a three Speed Chrome Moly Frame bike and he was on a High Tension Steel Frame bike for the same reason. The difference in how much you have to peddle is that noticeable.

Your next bike should be Chrome Moly or Aluminum for that reason. I would NOT upgrade your Huffy to much, going to a Chrome Moly or Aluminum frame bike would be a better option. For example someone suggested adding a rear gears, I would not, keep the bike as it is for it is a rugged easy to repair and maintain bike. Keep it as a "Beater" i.e. a bike you like and want to ride but if it gets beat up while you are riding it, that is why you bought it.

I am sorry, but you do need to look into something else. I recommend a Hybrid, a bike built like a Off Road Bike, but with smaller but taller wheels used on Road Bikes. It is a good compromise between an Off Road Bike and A road bike.

I would check out your bike. Huffy is silent about its frame, so it MAY be Chrome Moly, but most likely High Tension Steel. Most bikes made with Chrome Moly clearly say so, if it does NOT have any such markings it is a high tension steel bike.

A High Tension bike is NOT a bad bike, but it is a bike I would NOT upgrade but replace.