Opinions on versatile bike

There simply are not that many dirt roads with 20% grades. The OP did not
indicate anything like that, just poor road surfaces.

_ You don't get out west much do you? There are hundred and
hundreds of miles of forest roads with grades like that or
worse.

If there are that kind of grades out west..... should
one get a bike with disk brakes?

I live in Missouri.... the flat part. That's why I ask

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 16:37:19 -0500, wrote:

There simply are not that many dirt roads with 20% grades. The OP did not
indicate anything like that, just poor road surfaces.

_ You don't get out west much do you? There are hundred and
hundreds of miles of forest roads with grades like that or
worse.

If there are that kind of grades out west..... should
one get a bike with disk brakes?

I live in Missouri.... the flat part. That's why I ask

Dear Me,

Dear, me, no!

Despite inflated claims, 20% (and steeper) grades on public
roads are quite unusual anywhere in the U.S.

Dirt roads (as opposed to trails and 4-wheel-drive tracks)
are even less likely to have any significant stretches at
20% grade or steeper.

Without extensive drainage work, such roads would erode
severely as soon as rain fell in the forests mentioned.

When wet, even well-drained dirt roads that steep would also
be well-nigh impassable for ordinary traffic.

On the internet, steepness is often exaggerated.

Here's a site where you can see over seven thousand European
bicycle climbs, few of which exceed 20% grade for even short
stretches:

http://www.salite.ch/struttura/default.asp?Ultime=3

The lack of this kind of methodical mapping of bicycle
routes can lead to all sorts of strange claims concerning
grades.

Recent claims in this newsgroup concerning a public road in
Colorado, for example, appear to have drawn a straight
1-mile path between two contour lines on a topo map and
calculated the grade on that basis--even though the actual
road, clearly visible twisting on the map, was over 2 miles
long.

Carl Fogel

Per :
If there are that kind of grades out west..... should
one get a bike with disk brakes?

Personally, I don't see any issue of braking power in discs vs v's.

Instead, I see modulation as the main issue.

Based on that, it would make some diff what kind of surface the grades are.
--
PeteCresswell

Alex Rodriguez says...

Put some cross tires on your racing bike, assuming they will fit, and you
are good to go.
-------------
Alex

No way. It's a Six13. I want to go to about a 37.

David L. Johnson says...

Again, the OP was not talking about forest roads, or single track, or
other situations clearly calling for an off-road bike. He was talking
about occasional gravel patches, and potholes, on otherwise paved
surfaces.

Well, I may not have been all that clear in my original post, but the
gravel patches I encounter are usually at least a mile long. Long,
steep downhill grades are very common. If I'm exploring a new route,
just about any otherwise nice country road can abruptly turn into dirt.
When that happens, it is either go through it or go back. Going back
can mean either ending the ride early, or adding lots of grueling miles
to it. I live in southern Indiana BTW. Once you get off the main
roads, it gets very remote in a hurry.

In article ,
Fred Barney writes:
David L. Johnson says...

Again, the OP was not talking about forest roads, or single track, or
other situations clearly calling for an off-road bike. He was talking
about occasional gravel patches, and potholes, on otherwise paved
surfaces.

Well, I may not have been all that clear in my original post, but the
gravel patches I encounter are usually at least a mile long. Long,
steep downhill grades are very common. If I'm exploring a new route,
just about any otherwise nice country road can abruptly turn into dirt.
When that happens, it is either go through it or go back. Going back
can mean either ending the ride early, or adding lots of grueling miles
to it. I live in southern Indiana BTW. Once you get off the main
roads, it gets very remote in a hurry.

Okay then, look for a used 80's rigid-forked MTB, and bunny-hop with
impunity. A well-fitting one with a relaxed geometry approaching
that of a touring bike (the "T" in MTB stands for 'touring' anyways)
rather than something short 'n twitchy. 50-milers on such a bike are
trivial and easy to take, so long as you're not too concerned about
speed. Maybe go a little wide on the handlebar -- wide handlebars
are lovely on steep slopes. A pair of those inverted-tread MTB tires
might be just the ticket for your varied-but-not-extreme riding
surfaces. And if you have to deal with egg gravel, I think you'll
appreciate fatter/lower pressure tires more than anything on a
road[ish] bike. Some clicky top-mount shifters, a good mix of Exage
and Sugino, swap in a steel 24" granny ring to replace the ubiquitous,
stock 26" one, and yer sittin' pretty.

My mind's eye is picturing an old Diamondback ...


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

"Fred Barney" wrote in message
.net...
I'm researching my next bike purchase... I'm thinking:

a) A fully rigid MTB with slicks

b) Cyclocross

c) Sport touring along the lines of a Rivendell Rambouillet

Opinions?

Fred,

When shopping with the same ideas about two years ago, I ruled out the MTB right
away. After having already setup and used an MTB for just such a purpose, I
decided I didn't want to do that again. For starters, I like the responsiveness
of road geometry when riding the road, and I like drop bars. Drop bars provide
the variety of hand positions I need to stay comfortable over longer distances
and road steering is, well, quicker. And then there's the lighter weight -- why
drive a truck when you want a sports car?

Anyway, for a recommendation, I gotta say first off that your existing road
"racing" bike will probably work just fine for what you are talking about, if
you can fit fatter tires on it. Assuming it won't take the tires you want to
run, then I'll admit a cyclocross bike could be a really fun alternative.

A cyclocross frame will accept tires as fat as any you'd want on your road
machine; and for extended dirt road riding you'd likely sail along with a set of
knobby-tread cyclocross tires and have great time.

But you know the dirt-road advantages of cyclocross bikes already. What you may
not know is that the cyclocross frames are designed with higher bottom brackets
than regular road frames, which alters frame fit, raises the center of gravity,
and puts the saddle farther away from the ground. A raised COG and extended
leg-reach to the pavement from the saddle may not be what you want for road
riding.

Just for the sake of contrast, touring bikes a are designed to have lower bottom
brackets, which bring down the COG and make it easy for the rider to plant a
foot on the ground when stopped -- two features that are especially desirable
when wheeling around on a bike loaded down with lots of gear.

But if your plans are for neither loaded touring nor cyclocross racing, and your
road bike won't do what you want, then my opinion points directly at a sport
touring machine -- a versatile but sporty road bike -- especially if you are
going to be getting a really good one like the Rivendell Rambouillet that you
mentioned. It can run fatter tires, the high-end gearing of a racer, and the
low-end gearing of a mountain bike. It can sail down the road as fast as you can
go, and take on dirt, rain, and carry some cargo if you want. If you will choose
from the options on your list, and you want fast, light, and versatile, then a
good sport touring bike looks pretty good.

To see what you are talking about on the specific model, I googled Rivendale
Rambouillets -- wow! If I hadn't already built up a bike much like one of these,
I might get one myself! I admit I don't like everything about the stock
Rivendale package, but it has key features that I think make it a prototypical
sport-touring bike, and a very good one at that. The long-reach caliper brakes,
for example, are a brilliant selection, and the vendors seem reasonably amenable
to setting the bike up with custom components selections, so individual
preferences can be readily addressed.

http://www.rivendellbicycles.com/htm...letframes.html

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/rambouillet.html

Be sure, a sport-tourer (like the Rambouillet) can cover road rides with verve
and elan -- 50 miles, 100 miles or more -- and carry some cargo or go fast and
light. It can readily handle those dirt roads you mentioned, especially when
setup with fatter tires. I'd observe that a cyclocross bike may add well to your
bicycle collection -- it would be another exquisite specialist bike to
complement the two you already have --but if you are looking for high
performance of a practical kind, then the more versatile bike will be the best
one to be on when the rubber meets the road.

That's my $0.02 -- Happy hunting, and let us know what you've chosen and how you
like it once you've gotten some miles on it.

Seattle Mykal

A few weeks ago, I rode with a guy on a Fuji touring bike. It looked
like a good bang for the buck. See http://tinyurl.com/8sjnk . He
didn't seem to be at a disadvantage riding with a bunch of racers
through the steep hills in west Portland. -- Jay Beattie.

"Fred Barney" wrote in message
.net...


Well, I may not have been all that clear in my original post, but the
gravel patches I encounter are usually at least a mile long. Long,
steep downhill grades are very common. If I'm exploring a new route,
just about any otherwise nice country road can abruptly turn into dirt.
When that happens, it is either go through it or go back. Going back
can mean either ending the ride early, or adding lots of grueling miles
to it. I live in southern Indiana BTW. Once you get off the main
roads, it gets very remote in a hurry.

I might be missing something, but it sounds to me like what you need is what
you already have: a mountain bike. If your suspended one is too heavy, maybe
look at a non-suspended one, although these are increasingly hard to find
except at the very low end. An alternative might be a non-suspended hybrid.
I used to use a hybrid in conditions like you describe. I can't see how a
reasonably light mountain bike with slick tires is going to feel that slow
or heavy, and you wouldn't have to ride it as gingerly over bad
terrain/roads as you would a road bike. I disagree with those who suggest a
cross bike. A cross bike isn't a mountain bike with narrower tires and drop
bars.
Pete

Pete wrote:

I might be missing something, but it sounds to me like what you need is what
you already have: a mountain bike. If your suspended one is too heavy, maybe
look at a non-suspended one, although these are increasingly hard to find
except at the very low end. An alternative might be a non-suspended hybrid.
I used to use a hybrid in conditions like you describe. I can't see how a
reasonably light mountain bike with slick tires is going to feel that slow
or heavy, and you wouldn't have to ride it as gingerly over bad
terrain/roads as you would a road bike. I disagree with those who suggest a
cross bike. A cross bike isn't a mountain bike with narrower tires and drop
bars.

You suggest a "non suspended hybrid." Well, you could say that a
cyclocross bike is a "non-suspended hybrid with drop bars."

On a ride that was 50% dirt/gravel and 50% paved road, a 'cross bike
would be perfectly suitable.

More to the point, if you read between the lines of the OP's post and
his follow-ups, it *really* sounds like he wants a cyclocross bike, and
he's intent on buying a new bike. I know the feeling.

RichC