dumb chainring questions

On Apr 7, 1:07*pm, N8N wrote:
On Apr 7, 3:31*pm, landotter wrote:





On Apr 7, 1:37*pm, N8N wrote:

On Apr 7, 12:05*am, landotter wrote:

On Apr 6, 6:47*pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
snip

round.

sweet. *I *thought* so, but didn't 100% trust visual inspection.

Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. *However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring? *I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy... *my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. *Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

Which cross bike did he recommend? A good number of them are indeed
rather practical with braze-ons allowing mounting of fenders and racks
to domesticate the beasts. My LBS pushes Kona Jakes very heavily. The
drawback with cross bikes are the short chainstays that become an
issue when mounting fenders and if you decide to use a rack with
panniers, as you'll often suffer heel strike. If you have big dogs, a
proper touring bike would probably be a better choice for an all
rounder.

The guy at the LBS was pushing the Fuji Cross Comp, which actually
seemed like a nice bike, although I declined his offer to take it for
a spin (the only one he had in stock was about 2cm too big for me, so
I wasn't going to like it anyway, and I'm not seriously looking to buy
*right now.*) *Certainly a lot lighter than the hand me down MTB that
I currently have! *Felt like a dream hefting it. *Their price was
pretty good too compared to "recommended list."

You'll be enjoying the bike by riding, not hefting--keep that in mind.
A pound or two here or there matters little if you don't feel right in
the cockpit.

Fuji could be a nice all rounder, but it does bug me to see Formula
hubs instead of proper Shimano hubs on a $1K bike. It looks to have
most of the money in the frame and fork for folks that most likely
will purchase an upgraded wheelset at some point. I mean, you look at
a Kona entry level Jake for $200 less list, and you get LX hubs--but a
less fancy plain steel fork. Just a little perspective.

Hmm, that is an appealing looking option. *Three rings instead of two
would be nice for road riding as well, although what are your thoughts
on Tiagra vs. 105? *The sales rep kind of ran down Tiagra as if I
wouldn't be happy with a bike so equipped. *The list price for the
Jake is about what the LBS was offering the Fuji for, FWIW, although
the Jake the Snake is about comparable list for list. *All of this
advice is greatly appreciated as I probably haven't a clue as to what
brands are "good" and which are not anymore.


Tiagra's an excellent "bang for the buck" group. Still 9-speed, so
chains and cassettes are cheaper, and because MTBs are still 9-speed,
pretty future-proof. The gear indicator on the ST-4500 levers is
pretty danged cool. For a salesman to tell someone they wouldn't be
happy riding a certain group is pretty stoopid, IMO.

On Apr 7, 4:22*pm, landotter wrote:
On Apr 7, 3:07*pm, N8N wrote:





On Apr 7, 3:31*pm, landotter wrote:

On Apr 7, 1:37*pm, N8N wrote:

On Apr 7, 12:05*am, landotter wrote:

On Apr 6, 6:47*pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
snip

round.

sweet. *I *thought* so, but didn't 100% trust visual inspection.

Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. *However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring? *I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy.... *my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. *Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

Which cross bike did he recommend? A good number of them are indeed
rather practical with braze-ons allowing mounting of fenders and racks
to domesticate the beasts. My LBS pushes Kona Jakes very heavily. The
drawback with cross bikes are the short chainstays that become an
issue when mounting fenders and if you decide to use a rack with
panniers, as you'll often suffer heel strike. If you have big dogs, a
proper touring bike would probably be a better choice for an all
rounder.

The guy at the LBS was pushing the Fuji Cross Comp, which actually
seemed like a nice bike, although I declined his offer to take it for
a spin (the only one he had in stock was about 2cm too big for me, so
I wasn't going to like it anyway, and I'm not seriously looking to buy
*right now.*) *Certainly a lot lighter than the hand me down MTB that
I currently have! *Felt like a dream hefting it. *Their price was
pretty good too compared to "recommended list."

You'll be enjoying the bike by riding, not hefting--keep that in mind.
A pound or two here or there matters little if you don't feel right in
the cockpit.

Fuji could be a nice all rounder, but it does bug me to see Formula
hubs instead of proper Shimano hubs on a $1K bike. It looks to have
most of the money in the frame and fork for folks that most likely
will purchase an upgraded wheelset at some point. I mean, you look at
a Kona entry level Jake for $200 less list, and you get LX hubs--but a
less fancy plain steel fork. Just a little perspective.

Hmm, that is an appealing looking option. *Three rings instead of two
would be nice for road riding as well, although what are your thoughts
on Tiagra vs. 105? *The sales rep kind of ran down Tiagra as if I
wouldn't be happy with a bike so equipped. *The list price for the
Jake is about what the LBS was offering the Fuji for, FWIW, although
the Jake the Snake is about comparable list for list. *All of this
advice is greatly appreciated as I probably haven't a clue as to what
brands are "good" and which are not anymore.

I'm not necessarily a Kona-head by any means--but I do think that the
entry level Jake is really smartly specced all-rounder. Tiagra is more
than fine for a recreational rider. Drawbacks to the Jake are the same
as the Fuji when it comes to geometry: yes, you can mount fenders and
a rack for some light utility use, but with big feet there will be a
chance of heel strike and toe overlap on the front end. That's
something you don't think about till you ride the thing. If you wear
size 12s on a 58cm bike--I can pretty much guarantee it being an
issue.

Keep in mind that the same chunk of change buys a good basic touring
bike like a Surly LHT that's a stupendous all-rounder, with plenty of
heel clearance and toe clearance. Drawback compared to a Jake or the
Fuji are going to be a less sporty geometry and about five pounds of
various extra-strength bits.

Anything else I ought to be looking at? Although at this point it
seems that in my local situation the Cross Comp may actually be the
better buy as that was about $800ish while the Jake is going for list
at the only local store that lists it online. I did poke about
Surly's web site a little bit but they seem to be more of a frame
company rather than a complete bike company, not sure if I'm ready for
that level of commitment...

I do appreciate all the advice as I'd never heard of a lot of these
brands until I started doing a little online research recently.

Of course, step one which is "get out and ride" has yet to be
accomplished, although I did de-mothball both bikes yesterday so
hopefully I can talk SWMBO into going for a ride sometime this week.

nate

On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 19:47:18 -0400, Nate Nagel
may have said:

OK, please humor a dumb question... I've been pretty much out of cycling
for a good decade or more, because I've lives in pretty bike-unfriendly
areas. I do have a hand me down MTB and SWMBO has a decent-ish Trek she
bought herself a while back, when she expressed and interest in starting
riding semi-seriously, I figured I'd jump on that because I wouldn't
mind riding myself, I just hate doing it all by myself. So I stopped at
my LBS today and picked up some lights (my main excuse for not riding is
it's always dark when I *can* ride...) and of course while I was there
started looking at new bikes, it'd be nice to ride something that I
actually picked out myself and liked.

Anyway, question is this. Back when I was actually paying attention,
the newest and greatest thing was chainrings that weren't perfectly
round, e.g. "biopace" and similar setups. I hated them and far
preferred the old school round rings, my legs could tell the difference.
My question is this, which ended up taking over the market?

Biipace never became terribly popular. It has its adherents, and
there's a much larger group of people who simply can't tell the
difference, but the majority of the market remained with the round
sprocket. (Other attempts to essentially imitate the action of the
Biopace, involving even more complicated widgetry, have come and gone
as well.)

I see no
mention in any specs anywhere of round or non-round; I'd like to think
that the traditional round rings became the norm and Biopace died a
natural death, is this so?

Pretty much.

Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring?

The big front sprocket is most likely driving a rear cassette that has
an 11 tooth "top" gear, which would make the small front sprockets
less of a disadvantage. Whether the sprockets on the crank could be
swapped for larger ones is not cut-and-dried; if the bolt circle
diameter of the crank is not one for which much larger sprockets are
readily available, then it will be difficult to step up without
replacing the cranks. Additionally, if the front derailleur has a
short cage, you might have to change all three sprockets (or the crank
set, which is often cheaper) if you go up too much on the size of the
big ring. This, in turn, could necessitate swapping out the front
der. due to curvature mismatch.

I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy... my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

It's a potentially cheaper option, and gives you something to use in
evaluating what you really need.

Alternately, just put skinny city slicks on the MTB, and ride that
until you've decided what you really want as a replacement.

I apologize for being under a cycling rock for the last decade or so...
be nice

You came back...what's to criticise?

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

In article ,
Nate Nagel wrote:

OK, please humor a dumb question... I've been pretty much out of cycling
for a good decade or more, because I've lives in pretty bike-unfriendly
areas. I do have a hand me down MTB and SWMBO has a decent-ish Trek she
bought herself a while back, when she expressed and interest in starting
riding semi-seriously, I figured I'd jump on that because I wouldn't
mind riding myself, I just hate doing it all by myself. So I stopped at
my LBS today and picked up some lights (my main excuse for not riding is
it's always dark when I *can* ride...) and of course while I was there
started looking at new bikes, it'd be nice to ride something that I
actually picked out myself and liked.

Anyway, question is this. Back when I was actually paying attention,
the newest and greatest thing was chainrings that weren't perfectly
round, e.g. "biopace" and similar setups. I hated them and far
preferred the old school round rings, my legs could tell the difference.
My question is this, which ended up taking over the market? I see no
mention in any specs anywhere of round or non-round; I'd like to think
that the traditional round rings became the norm and Biopace died a
natural death, is this so? If not, what component sets still use round
chainrings?

Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring? I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy... my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

How tall are you? What features does your ideal have?
Outright spinning is not necessary;
yet knowing how to keep the cadence up to 90 rpm
can help. I like a bicycle nifty in
the turns, and build for that.

I apologize for being under a cycling rock for the last decade or so...
be nice

No apologies necessary.

--
Michael Press

Michael Press wrote:

How tall are you?

5'11", 32" inseam

What features does your ideal have?

reasonably light. Able to ride most anywhere but no serious
off-roading. Low maintenance. Well built enough and high enough
quality components that I won't end up getting PO'd at the shifters/DRs
etc. or pointed at and laughed at by other cyclists Cheap. (I
realize that I will have to compromise on the last, just not sure how much.)

Basically looking for something that I can just step over and ride on
roads and (mostly paved) trails that's a couple steps above an X-mart
bike. Possibly with an eye to longer touring if I can get SWMBO into it
as well. "sportiness" preferred over comfort if a tradeoff between the
two is involved. I have no desire to constantly upgrade to "newest and
best" so if I do buy something I'll probably keep it until it's well and
truly thrashed.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

On Apr 7, 3:33 pm, N8N wrote:
On Apr 7, 4:22 pm, landotter wrote:



On Apr 7, 3:07 pm, N8N wrote:

On Apr 7, 3:31 pm, landotter wrote:

On Apr 7, 1:37 pm, N8N wrote:

On Apr 7, 12:05 am, landotter wrote:

On Apr 6, 6:47 pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
snip

round.

sweet. I *thought* so, but didn't 100% trust visual inspection.

Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring? I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy... my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

Which cross bike did he recommend? A good number of them are indeed
rather practical with braze-ons allowing mounting of fenders and racks
to domesticate the beasts. My LBS pushes Kona Jakes very heavily. The
drawback with cross bikes are the short chainstays that become an
issue when mounting fenders and if you decide to use a rack with
panniers, as you'll often suffer heel strike. If you have big dogs, a
proper touring bike would probably be a better choice for an all
rounder.

The guy at the LBS was pushing the Fuji Cross Comp, which actually
seemed like a nice bike, although I declined his offer to take it for
a spin (the only one he had in stock was about 2cm too big for me, so
I wasn't going to like it anyway, and I'm not seriously looking to buy
*right now.*) Certainly a lot lighter than the hand me down MTB that
I currently have! Felt like a dream hefting it. Their price was
pretty good too compared to "recommended list."

You'll be enjoying the bike by riding, not hefting--keep that in mind.
A pound or two here or there matters little if you don't feel right in
the cockpit.

Fuji could be a nice all rounder, but it does bug me to see Formula
hubs instead of proper Shimano hubs on a $1K bike. It looks to have
most of the money in the frame and fork for folks that most likely
will purchase an upgraded wheelset at some point. I mean, you look at
a Kona entry level Jake for $200 less list, and you get LX hubs--but a
less fancy plain steel fork. Just a little perspective.

Hmm, that is an appealing looking option. Three rings instead of two
would be nice for road riding as well, although what are your thoughts
on Tiagra vs. 105? The sales rep kind of ran down Tiagra as if I
wouldn't be happy with a bike so equipped. The list price for the
Jake is about what the LBS was offering the Fuji for, FWIW, although
the Jake the Snake is about comparable list for list. All of this
advice is greatly appreciated as I probably haven't a clue as to what
brands are "good" and which are not anymore.

I'm not necessarily a Kona-head by any means--but I do think that the
entry level Jake is really smartly specced all-rounder. Tiagra is more
than fine for a recreational rider. Drawbacks to the Jake are the same
as the Fuji when it comes to geometry: yes, you can mount fenders and
a rack for some light utility use, but with big feet there will be a
chance of heel strike and toe overlap on the front end. That's
something you don't think about till you ride the thing. If you wear
size 12s on a 58cm bike--I can pretty much guarantee it being an
issue.

Keep in mind that the same chunk of change buys a good basic touring
bike like a Surly LHT that's a stupendous all-rounder, with plenty of
heel clearance and toe clearance. Drawback compared to a Jake or the
Fuji are going to be a less sporty geometry and about five pounds of
various extra-strength bits.

Anything else I ought to be looking at? Although at this point it
seems that in my local situation the Cross Comp may actually be the
better buy as that was about $800ish while the Jake is going for list
at the only local store that lists it online. I did poke about
Surly's web site a little bit but they seem to be more of a frame
company rather than a complete bike company, not sure if I'm ready for
that level of commitment...

Any bike shop can order you a complete Cross-Check or LHT for around
$900. Probably more than you want to spend right now, perhaps--but
both are specced perfectly IMHO, and are bikes you'll be satisfied
with for years.

Do ya gotta spend big bucks to have fun? Nah. I just got back from a
~40 miler on my Kona Dew which I've turned into a sorta adventure
touring city bike thingamajig. Only about $500 invested, but seriously
fun. Did road, path, gravel road, and some fire road with 20 pounds of
gear in my bags in case I broke something in the boonies. Sort of the
same concept as a domesticated crosser, but with mtb controls. Strong
as hell with the wheels I built for it--there's something to be said
for a bike that'll just go anywhere and isn't dainty. It's
heartbreaking to be on a delicate road bike and see a dirt road
calling you.

On Apr 7, 3:45*pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
Michael Press wrote:
How tall are you?

5'11", 32" inseam

What features does your ideal have?

reasonably light. *Able to ride most anywhere but no serious
off-roading. *Low maintenance. *Well built enough and high enough
quality components that I won't end up getting PO'd at the shifters/DRs
etc. or pointed at and laughed at by other cyclists *Cheap. *(I
realize that I will have to compromise on the last, just not sure how much..)

Basically looking for something that I can just step over and ride on
roads and (mostly paved) trails that's a couple steps above an X-mart
bike. *Possibly with an eye to longer touring if I can get SWMBO into it
as well. *"sportiness" preferred over comfort if a tradeoff between the
two is involved. *I have no desire to constantly upgrade to "newest and
best" so if I do buy something I'll probably keep it until it's well and
truly thrashed.

Two words: Craig's List. Look for an old Trek 1000 or something along
those lines. If you are in the average size range and live in a
largish city, then you will have many options. Too bad you don't live
in Portland -- here's a Trek 1000 for $350. http://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/bik/632656225.html
Here's a Pilot for $750 (I'm sure he'll take $600 -- look at all the
excuses for not riding. He wants that thing gone!)
http://portland.craigslist.org/clc/bik/630711105.html Not that I'm
sold on Treks, but they are plentiful on Craig's List. If you want a
real touring frame, try this brand new Surley Long Haul Trucker.
http://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/bik/632978430.html -- Jay Beattie.

landotter wrote:
On Apr 7, 3:33 pm, N8N wrote:

On Apr 7, 4:22 pm, landotter wrote:




On Apr 7, 3:07 pm, N8N wrote:

On Apr 7, 3:31 pm, landotter wrote:

On Apr 7, 1:37 pm, N8N wrote:

On Apr 7, 12:05 am, landotter wrote:

On Apr 6, 6:47 pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
snip

round.

sweet. I *thought* so, but didn't 100% trust visual inspection.

Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring? I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy... my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

Which cross bike did he recommend? A good number of them are indeed
rather practical with braze-ons allowing mounting of fenders and racks
to domesticate the beasts. My LBS pushes Kona Jakes very heavily. The
drawback with cross bikes are the short chainstays that become an
issue when mounting fenders and if you decide to use a rack with
panniers, as you'll often suffer heel strike. If you have big dogs, a
proper touring bike would probably be a better choice for an all
rounder.

The guy at the LBS was pushing the Fuji Cross Comp, which actually
seemed like a nice bike, although I declined his offer to take it for
a spin (the only one he had in stock was about 2cm too big for me, so
I wasn't going to like it anyway, and I'm not seriously looking to buy
*right now.*) Certainly a lot lighter than the hand me down MTB that
I currently have! Felt like a dream hefting it. Their price was
pretty good too compared to "recommended list."

You'll be enjoying the bike by riding, not hefting--keep that in mind.
A pound or two here or there matters little if you don't feel right in
the cockpit.

Fuji could be a nice all rounder, but it does bug me to see Formula
hubs instead of proper Shimano hubs on a $1K bike. It looks to have
most of the money in the frame and fork for folks that most likely
will purchase an upgraded wheelset at some point. I mean, you look at
a Kona entry level Jake for $200 less list, and you get LX hubs--but a
less fancy plain steel fork. Just a little perspective.

Hmm, that is an appealing looking option. Three rings instead of two
would be nice for road riding as well, although what are your thoughts
on Tiagra vs. 105? The sales rep kind of ran down Tiagra as if I
wouldn't be happy with a bike so equipped. The list price for the
Jake is about what the LBS was offering the Fuji for, FWIW, although
the Jake the Snake is about comparable list for list. All of this
advice is greatly appreciated as I probably haven't a clue as to what
brands are "good" and which are not anymore.

I'm not necessarily a Kona-head by any means--but I do think that the
entry level Jake is really smartly specced all-rounder. Tiagra is more
than fine for a recreational rider. Drawbacks to the Jake are the same
as the Fuji when it comes to geometry: yes, you can mount fenders and
a rack for some light utility use, but with big feet there will be a
chance of heel strike and toe overlap on the front end. That's
something you don't think about till you ride the thing. If you wear
size 12s on a 58cm bike--I can pretty much guarantee it being an
issue.

Keep in mind that the same chunk of change buys a good basic touring
bike like a Surly LHT that's a stupendous all-rounder, with plenty of
heel clearance and toe clearance. Drawback compared to a Jake or the
Fuji are going to be a less sporty geometry and about five pounds of
various extra-strength bits.

Anything else I ought to be looking at? Although at this point it
seems that in my local situation the Cross Comp may actually be the
better buy as that was about $800ish while the Jake is going for list
at the only local store that lists it online. I did poke about
Surly's web site a little bit but they seem to be more of a frame
company rather than a complete bike company, not sure if I'm ready for
that level of commitment...


Any bike shop can order you a complete Cross-Check or LHT for around
$900. Probably more than you want to spend right now, perhaps--but
both are specced perfectly IMHO, and are bikes you'll be satisfied
with for years.

Do ya gotta spend big bucks to have fun? Nah. I just got back from a
~40 miler on my Kona Dew which I've turned into a sorta adventure
touring city bike thingamajig. Only about $500 invested, but seriously
fun. Did road, path, gravel road, and some fire road with 20 pounds of
gear in my bags in case I broke something in the boonies. Sort of the
same concept as a domesticated crosser, but with mtb controls. Strong
as hell with the wheels I built for it--there's something to be said
for a bike that'll just go anywhere and isn't dainty. It's
heartbreaking to be on a delicate road bike and see a dirt road
calling you.

Oh I agree 100%. this discussion from my perspective has been more
hypothetical than anything; I'll probably end up impulse-buying
something off craigslist or something because I'm a cheap b*****d. I'm
just trying to get a feel for what's out there that's actually *good*
and this has been very helpful. I don't want to blow my ill-gotten
fistful of quarters on something that sucks, now, do I?

What's so magical about Surlys anyway? Looking on their web site they
look all right, but the components aren't as flashy as some more
mainstream brands. Obviously there must be something about them that
works because people buy them, but what is it? Is it kind of a low-key,
Dodge Dart-like competence (please, don't be offended, my ex had a '69
Valiant and I loved that car even if nobody else did) or something else
that I'm missing?

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

On Apr 7, 7:51 pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
landotter wrote:
On Apr 7, 3:33 pm, N8N wrote:

On Apr 7, 4:22 pm, landotter wrote:

On Apr 7, 3:07 pm, N8N wrote:

On Apr 7, 3:31 pm, landotter wrote:

On Apr 7, 1:37 pm, N8N wrote:

On Apr 7, 12:05 am, landotter wrote:

On Apr 6, 6:47 pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
snip

round.

sweet. I *thought* so, but didn't 100% trust visual inspection.

Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring? I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy... my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

Which cross bike did he recommend? A good number of them are indeed
rather practical with braze-ons allowing mounting of fenders and racks
to domesticate the beasts. My LBS pushes Kona Jakes very heavily. The
drawback with cross bikes are the short chainstays that become an
issue when mounting fenders and if you decide to use a rack with
panniers, as you'll often suffer heel strike. If you have big dogs, a
proper touring bike would probably be a better choice for an all
rounder.

The guy at the LBS was pushing the Fuji Cross Comp, which actually
seemed like a nice bike, although I declined his offer to take it for
a spin (the only one he had in stock was about 2cm too big for me, so
I wasn't going to like it anyway, and I'm not seriously looking to buy
*right now.*) Certainly a lot lighter than the hand me down MTB that
I currently have! Felt like a dream hefting it. Their price was
pretty good too compared to "recommended list."

You'll be enjoying the bike by riding, not hefting--keep that in mind.
A pound or two here or there matters little if you don't feel right in
the cockpit.

Fuji could be a nice all rounder, but it does bug me to see Formula
hubs instead of proper Shimano hubs on a $1K bike. It looks to have
most of the money in the frame and fork for folks that most likely
will purchase an upgraded wheelset at some point. I mean, you look at
a Kona entry level Jake for $200 less list, and you get LX hubs--but a
less fancy plain steel fork. Just a little perspective.

Hmm, that is an appealing looking option. Three rings instead of two
would be nice for road riding as well, although what are your thoughts
on Tiagra vs. 105? The sales rep kind of ran down Tiagra as if I
wouldn't be happy with a bike so equipped. The list price for the
Jake is about what the LBS was offering the Fuji for, FWIW, although
the Jake the Snake is about comparable list for list. All of this
advice is greatly appreciated as I probably haven't a clue as to what
brands are "good" and which are not anymore.

I'm not necessarily a Kona-head by any means--but I do think that the
entry level Jake is really smartly specced all-rounder. Tiagra is more
than fine for a recreational rider. Drawbacks to the Jake are the same
as the Fuji when it comes to geometry: yes, you can mount fenders and
a rack for some light utility use, but with big feet there will be a
chance of heel strike and toe overlap on the front end. That's
something you don't think about till you ride the thing. If you wear
size 12s on a 58cm bike--I can pretty much guarantee it being an
issue.

Keep in mind that the same chunk of change buys a good basic touring
bike like a Surly LHT that's a stupendous all-rounder, with plenty of
heel clearance and toe clearance. Drawback compared to a Jake or the
Fuji are going to be a less sporty geometry and about five pounds of
various extra-strength bits.

Anything else I ought to be looking at? Although at this point it
seems that in my local situation the Cross Comp may actually be the
better buy as that was about $800ish while the Jake is going for list
at the only local store that lists it online. I did poke about
Surly's web site a little bit but they seem to be more of a frame
company rather than a complete bike company, not sure if I'm ready for
that level of commitment...

Any bike shop can order you a complete Cross-Check or LHT for around
$900. Probably more than you want to spend right now, perhaps--but
both are specced perfectly IMHO, and are bikes you'll be satisfied
with for years.

Do ya gotta spend big bucks to have fun? Nah. I just got back from a
~40 miler on my Kona Dew which I've turned into a sorta adventure
touring city bike thingamajig. Only about $500 invested, but seriously
fun. Did road, path, gravel road, and some fire road with 20 pounds of
gear in my bags in case I broke something in the boonies. Sort of the
same concept as a domesticated crosser, but with mtb controls. Strong
as hell with the wheels I built for it--there's something to be said
for a bike that'll just go anywhere and isn't dainty. It's
heartbreaking to be on a delicate road bike and see a dirt road
calling you.

Oh I agree 100%. this discussion from my perspective has been more
hypothetical than anything; I'll probably end up impulse-buying
something off craigslist or something because I'm a cheap b*****d. I'm
just trying to get a feel for what's out there that's actually *good*
and this has been very helpful. I don't want to blow my ill-gotten
fistful of quarters on something that sucks, now, do I?

What's so magical about Surlys anyway? Looking on their web site they
look all right, but the components aren't as flashy as some more
mainstream brands. Obviously there must be something about them that
works because people buy them, but what is it? Is it kind of a low-key,
Dodge Dart-like competence (please, don't be offended, my ex had a '69
Valiant and I loved that car even if nobody else did) or something else
that I'm missing?

It's good design and strong frames that are traditional where it
counts. Look at a Cross Check for example. You can race it like a
crosser...but look at the rear drops, they're horizontal so you can
run it as a single speed or fixed gear if ya get bored. Fits both road
and mtb hubs with 132.5 spacing. Look, there's two sets of eyelets for
a rack and fenders if ya wanna tour it. Fits stupidly wide tires,
unlike some cross bikes.

The spec on the built up ones isn't flashy, but it's strong and smart.
The LHT carries XT hubs and rear mech with bar ends that promise utter
reliability. No fancy wheels--good ones with quality hubs spokes and
rims. Lots of stem spacers, so you're nice and comfy--you decide if
you want to cut the fork down or not. Beautiful traditionally crowned
forks to boot.

Anyway, the Cult of Surly is simply because they're a no bull**** good
time tested design. Not too heavy, but not underbuilt. Good stuff. My
next bike will be an LHT with fat tires for sure.

Nate Nagel wrote:
[...]
What's so magical about Surlys anyway? Looking on their web site they
look all right, but the components aren't as flashy as some more
mainstream brands. Obviously there must be something about them that
works because people buy them, but what is it? Is it kind of a low-key,
Dodge Dart-like competence (please, don't be offended, my ex had a '69
Valiant and I loved that car even if nobody else did) or something else
that I'm missing?

Watch out for Peterbilt 281 tanker trucks!

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful