Is it wrong to just own one bike

[Nothereforafasttime]

Thoroughly anticipating this post to ruffle a few feathers in the cycling community (see I got your attention already )but here goes...

Is it wrong to own just one bike?

There, I've said it - phew!

In all seriousness though - I've always had this opinion that the bike I ride (a Reilly Gradient titanium) serves me brilliantly all year round so I don't want or need another bike.  I don't commute on a bike but if I did I could and would still use this one and I don't do any serious off-road stuff so I don't need (or want) a mountain bike.  I've just got a couple of boxes of clothing and equipment and they fulfill my needs on any of my audax adventures.  Put simply, the bike and all I own gets me where I want to be.

So there you go - controversial to which I fully expect to be horsewhipped to within an inch of my life for making such ridiculous statements.

It's been nice knowing know....

[Kim]

No it's fine.  It's owning less than one bike that's the problem.

[Palinurus]

I only had space for one bike for many years (I hardly had space for that!), I liked it- nice and simple. Having multiple bikes is a bit of a headache sometimes.

[Ian H]

All you need are discreet mudguard & rack eyes and you have a do-anything bike.

[sib]

No..especially one as nice as that.
When i stop racing I'm gonna flog all my bikes and have just one shiny Ti like that to carry me everywhere...slowly. 

[grams]

All you need are discreet mudguard & rack eyes and you have a do-anything bike.

Unless one of those things is "lock it up for a few hours in [any place with bike thieves] and have it all still be there when you get back". For that you need a second bike, and from there it's a slippery slope...

[Cudzoziemiec]

The only problem with not being multivelopic is when it leaves you transportless.

[zigzag]

it's fine if one bike covers your needs. if you started using it for different activities (commuting, leaving it locked on the street, taking on the trains often, racing, riding mtb trails etc.) you'd soon find you need more bikes. plus, it's always nice to have some redundancy.

[Kim]

The only problem with not being multivelopic is when it leaves you transportless.

Agreed.

[Nothereforafasttime]

The only problem with not being multivelopic is when it leaves you transportless.

Agreed.

I assume this is if you didn't own an alternative mode of transport?

[zigzag]

The only problem with not being multivelopic is when it leaves you transportless.

Agreed.

I assume this is if you didn't own an alternative mode of transport?

if you can join your club ride or an audax with your alternative mode of transport, then it's fine.

[Nothereforafasttime]

The only problem with not being multivelopic is when it leaves you transportless.

Agreed.

I assume this is if you didn't own an alternative mode of transport?

if you can join your club ride or an audax with your alternative mode of transport, then it's fine.

Oh, gotcha.  Of course that's the sticking point if it's a serious issue with said bike. 

[grams]

The only problem with not being multivelopic is when it leaves you transportless.

Being multivelopic is also quite capable of leaving you transportless. I'd posit the likelihood of not having any that are in usable order actually increases with n...

[Paul H]

Nothing wrong with it at all, though sometimes it's nice to have a spare both for the practical reasons above and also simply for a change.
I have three do-it-all bikes, though one of them is a folder and the only rides I've done in the last decade that couldn't be done on any of them was when I needed it to fold.

[ijsbrand]

Is it wrong to own just one bike?

Having lived in the bicycle theft capital of the world, my paranoia about the possibilities of losing my bike is rather developed. This wasn't helped when I had saved for years and finally could buy a bespoke touring bike that then never turned up in the south of France, even though we supposedly had traveled on the same flight there. Yet, I don't want to ride around on my bike constantly. Any bicycle should allow me to stop, chain it to the world, and leave.

Owning more than one bike has been the only remedy for solving the almost crippling doubt that no parking spot ever would be a save parking spot. YMMV.

[D.A.L.E.]

I would love to have only one bike. Something that could take skinny 700c and chunky 650b tyres would be the dream. But then it'd get nicked and I'd have no bike.

[Kim]

Something that's fast, comfortable, good off-road, handles well when loaded with heavy luggage, unlikely to get nicked and folds small enough to cope with BloodyTrains would be lovely, yes.

But wanting all those things is a cycling enthusiast's affliction.

[Ben T]

Thoroughly anticipating this post to ruffle a few feathers in the cycling community (see I got your attention already )but here goes...

Is it wrong to own just one bike?

There, I've said it - phew!

In all seriousness though - I've always had this opinion that the bike I ride (a Reilly Gradient titanium) serves me brilliantly all year round so I don't want or need another bike.  I don't commute on a bike but if I did I could and would still use this one and I don't do any serious off-road stuff so I don't need (or want) a mountain bike.  I've just got a couple of boxes of clothing and equipment and they fulfill my needs on any of my audax adventures.  Put simply, the bike and all I own gets me where I want to be.

So there you go - controversial to which I fully expect to be horsewhipped to within an inch of my life for making such ridiculous statements.

It's been nice knowing know....

You tell yourself that. 

[Nothereforafasttime]

Something that's fast, comfortable, good off-road, handles well when loaded with heavy luggage, unlikely to get nicked and folds small enough to cope with BloodyTrains would be lovely, yes.

But wanting all those things is a cycling enthusiast's affliction.

Fast = My Reilly but surely it very much depends on how fit one is
Comfortable = My Reilly with my Infinity saddle
Good off-road = My Reilly with some gravel tyres
Handles well when fully loaded = My Reilly
Unlikely to get nicked = My Reilly, e.g. don't leave it anywhere unattended for more than an hour, e.g. coffee stop (and get a cafe lock)
Folds small enough = Do you need to fold it (unless you're commuting on a train in rush hour I guess?)

I'm almost there with my Reilly (just not the 'small enough to cope with trains' bit, but then that's not an issue for me fortunately).

[Kim]

Something that's fast, comfortable, good off-road, handles well when loaded with heavy luggage, unlikely to get nicked and folds small enough to cope with BloodyTrains would be lovely, yes.

But wanting all those things is a cycling enthusiast's affliction.

Fast = My Reilly but surely it very much depends on how fit one is

For a given rider, a fast bike will be faster (less effort for the same speed) than a slow bike.  Anyone who thinks that all bikes perform similarly hasn't ridden different enough bikes.

Comfortable = My Reilly with my Infinity saddle
Good off-road = My Reilly with some gravel tyres

Nothing with a saddle is truly comfortable.  Nothing with a seat is good off-road.  That's n=2 right there.

Unlikely to get nicked = My Reilly, e.g. don't leave it anywhere unattended for more than an hour, e.g. coffee stop (and get a cafe lock)
Folds small enough = Do you need to fold it (unless you're commuting on a train in rush hour I guess?)

I'm almost there with my Reilly (just not the 'small enough to cope with trains' bit, but then that's not an issue for me fortunately).

That you can easily get around a requirement for a bike that can do x by not doing x was my original point.

[grams]

Unlikely to get nicked = My Reilly, e.g. don't leave it anywhere unattended for more than an hour, e.g. coffee stop

Less than a minute with a cordless angle grinder and it's gone.

(and get a cafe lock)

Or a sharp pair of scissors.

[Salvatore]

Andy Wilkinson has/had a bike which he used for record-breaking timetrialling, commuting, touring, 'serious off-road ventures'  and 'running about town'. Different purposes required swapping the wheels, so whether it's a single bike is open to debate.

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/andy-wilkinsons-dolan-time-trial-bike-29431

[Nothereforafasttime]

Andy Wilkinson has/had a bike which he used for record-breaking timetrialling, commuting, touring, 'serious off-road ventures'  and 'running about town'. Different purposes required swapping the wheels, so whether it's a single bike is open to debate.

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/andy-wilkinsons-dolan-time-trial-bike-29431

I’d accept that as one bike definitely. It’s all I would ever do with my Reilly. Can take up to 45mm tyres so it’s designed for on and off road.

[drossall]

It's fine only to own one bike. But please tell us how you manage to do it?

[mzjo]

Andy Wilkinson has/had a bike which he used for record-breaking timetrialling, commuting, touring, 'serious off-road ventures'  and 'running about town'. Different purposes required swapping the wheels, so whether it's a single bike is open to debate.

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/andy-wilkinsons-dolan-time-trial-bike-29431

I also was thinking of this bike. Changing wheels is not a showstopper with suitable wheel carriers. Finishing your TT to find someone had nicked your luggage and touring wheels probably would be

Something that's fast, comfortable, good off-road, handles well when loaded with heavy luggage, unlikely to get nicked and folds small enough to cope with BloodyTrains would be lovely, yes.

But wanting all those things is a cycling enthusiast's affliction.

Fast = My Reilly but surely it very much depends on how fit one is
Comfortable = My Reilly with my Infinity saddle
Good off-road = My Reilly with some gravel tyres
Handles well when fully loaded = My Reilly
Unlikely to get nicked = My Reilly, e.g. don't leave it anywhere unattended for more than an hour, e.g. coffee stop (and get a cafe lock)
Folds small enough = Do you need to fold it (unless you're commuting on a train in rush hour I guess?)

I'm almost there with my Reilly (just not the 'small enough to cope with trains' bit, but then that's not an issue for me fortunately).

I would suggest that an Airnimal Rhino might be closer to Kim's requirements except that it's not recumbent. The advantage of folding is that you can (a lot of the time) keep the bike by you in the situations where it might get nicked (although station loos might be a bit inconvenient). Someone must make a folding recumbent that would comply although I must admit that it is not my first idea of a good option off-road.