What categories of bike do you own?

[Drago]

I've got one too (albeit not currently built up) and I've dried up my tears and moved on.

 

[numbnuts]

Trike ?

 

[Dogtrousers]

All categorisations will be flawed. I'll have a go. I'm basing mine primarily on rider position.

All bikes may have two or three wheels, and may accomodate one or two riders (not including children in special seats) and may or may not have electrical assistance. I think I'll rule out internal combustion assistance as being mopeds.

Racer: Relatively aero position. Drop bars or tri/TT bars. Includes race bikes, CX, Gravel, TT, drop barred tourers, track bikes.
MTB: Upright position. Flat bars, intended for off road use. Supplied with knobbly tyres, May have suspension.
Upright. Upright position, flat bars, supplied with slick(ish) tyres, intended primarily for on road use. Does not fold up. Includes regular hybrids, Dutch bikes, city hire bikes, "Raleigh twenty" style shoppers, flat bar tourers/adventure bikes, American "cruiser" style bikes, whacky fixies with miniscule flat bars, bikes with butterfly bars.
Folder. Folds up. Includes bikes that fold up, or are designed to come to bits for transport and not ones that don't. Any rider position except recumbent.
Recument. Recumbents of all types (hi and lo racers, trikes etc). At least one rider is in a recumbent position (feet first). Includes recumbents that fold up.
Special. Includes trick bikes, "ordinaries", unicycles, mobile pedal propelled bars, bikes for more than two people, with more than three wheels etc.

Hmmm... As @User says it's a doomed exercise.

 

[Drago]

Unfortunately Mr Trousers, my curiosity extended into then realms of greater details. I'm not interested in categories per se, hence me not wanting to lump bikes together to create the more general categories you describe, but I was keen to find out about the wonderful diversity and versatility of bicycle types.

Trikes, recumbents, other HPVs, unicycles, tandems etc were all on my list, so they didn't get forgotten, I was simply unable to include them

Still and all, at time of writing there are 93 votes, which is not an insignificant response.

 

[iandg]

I classed the Genesis Equilibrium as a sportive bike, the audax bike as a light tourer. my Raleigh that I raced on 70's/80's is now fixed so I called it that and the rigid Trek MTB as a rigid MTB.

Also have a Surly Cross-Check that I don't think fits into any of the categories.

 

[vickster]

I classed the Genesis Equilibrium as a sportive bike, the audax bike as a light tourer. my Raleigh that I raced on 70's/80's is now fixed so I called it that and the rigid Trek MTB as a rigid MTB.

Also have a Surly Cross-Check that I don't think fits into any of the categories.

while I classified my Equilbrium as a light tourer, my Pearson as a sportive bike and my SS as erm a SS. My CX has been left out in the cold

 

[Drago]

Surly claim its a "...cyclo-cross bike by design...".

Nice looking machine it it's too.

 

[Cuchilo]

I think you have done very well Mr Drago . Have a biscuit

 

[Drago]

Thanks Cuchio. I was just about to nip out and shoot myself, but on reflection a biscuit does seem more appealing

 

[Dogtrousers]

I classed both my Spa Audax and Dawes Shadow as "racers" on the grounds that I'm a child of the 70s and anything with drop bars is a racer. I didn't have a clue what "sportive bike" meant and the "tourer" classifications were unclear.

 

[velovoice]

I classed the Genesis Equilibrium as a sportive bike, the audax bike as a light tourer. my Raleigh that I raced on 70's/80's is now fixed so I called it that and the rigid Trek MTB as a rigid MTB.

Also have a Surly Cross-Check that I don't think fits into any of the categories.

while I classified my Equilbrium as a light tourer, my Pearson as a sportive bike and my SS as erm a SS. My CX has been left out in the cold

Both interesting takes on my own dilemma. I classed my Enigma Etape (designed for loaded touring) as the sportive bike (because it's what I would strip down and ride if I ever were to enter a sportive), the Surly Cross Check as the full on tourer/expedition bike (because, well, hey, it could), the vintage road frame built up with all modern components as the road racer, the Brompton as the folder (d'oh). That leaves the vintage city bike (identical frame as the road racer ) out in the cold.

Surly claim its a "...cyclo-cross bike by design...".

Except it's far too heavy to race on.

 

[iandg]

while I classified my Equilbrium as a light tourer, my Pearson as a sportive bike and my SS as erm a SS. My CX has been left out in the cold

Versatility is why I bought the Genesis - currently used for training, day rides and local group rides. If the club ever get around to organising evening TT's I could use it for those, and with the rack/guard brazings I could easily add guards and a rack and head out for a short lightweight tour

 

[vickster]

Versatility is why I bought the Genesis - currently used for training, day rides and local group rides. If the club ever get around to organising evening TT's I could use it for those, and with the rack/guard brazings I could easily add guards and a rack and head out for a short lightweight tour

Indeed, mine's a 2013 (IIRC) frame, so no rack braze ons but attached with P clips, full mudguards fitted, it's my wet weather bike (not that I choose to ride in the rain)

 

[tommaguzzi]

Electric?

 

[Milkfloat]