Opinions on versatile bike

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 20:35:00 -0700, Tom Keats wrote:

I note cyclocross bikes have been mentioned a
lot, but I think those things come with a lot of unnecessary specs for
your wants & needs.

Very true. A lot, though, like the Surly Cross-Check and Bianchi Volpe,
seem designed more for randonneuring than for loony Englishmen to tote
about over fallen logs. LOL :P

In article ,
maxo writes:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 20:35:00 -0700, Tom Keats wrote:

I note cyclocross bikes have been mentioned a
lot, but I think those things come with a lot of unnecessary specs for
your wants & needs.

Very true. A lot, though, like the Surly Cross-Check and Bianchi Volpe,
seem designed more for randonneuring than for loony Englishmen to tote
about over fallen logs. LOL :P

If things in my life fell into place the right way, I
could easily get into randonneuring. All I'd need is
a rich guy to adopt me and call me "Young Man", a la
"Magic Christian". And the bike I'd want wouldn't be
something to loonily heave-ho over fallen logs; it would
be built for relentlessly continuing along highways &
byways, and have everything necessary to keep going all
day and all night, in lots of different weather/lighting
conditions.

The thing about Surly is, I just like the /name/.
How apropos for a morning commute bike.

The (steel) Marinoni Turismo is an Institution up here in
canada, and rightly & deservedly so. So is the Mariposa
Randonneur.

When I eventually do Iceland, I'm gonna do it on my old,
wide-handlebar'd, hi-tens-framed, 6-spd, rigid-forked
Norco Bigfoot, with the old style canti brakes 'n all.
'Cuz I /know/ that ol' beast is tough enough. And I've
invested a lot of effort into developing a bunch of
musculature (especially in the calves) to make that
weighty sonofabitch go.


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

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 00:26:10 -0700, Tom Keats wrote:

In article ,
maxo writes:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 20:35:00 -0700, Tom Keats wrote:

I note cyclocross bikes have been mentioned a
lot, but I think those things come with a lot of unnecessary specs for
your wants & needs.

Very true. A lot, though, like the Surly Cross-Check and Bianchi Volpe,
seem designed more for randonneuring than for loony Englishmen to tote
about over fallen logs. LOL :P

If things in my life fell into place the right way, I could easily get
into randonneuring. All I'd need is a rich guy to adopt me and call me
"Young Man", a la "Magic Christian". And the bike I'd want wouldn't be
something to loonily heave-ho over fallen logs; it would be built for
relentlessly continuing along highways & byways, and have everything
necessary to keep going all day and all night, in lots of different
weather/lighting conditions.

The internet is sure to help you find such an arrangement. Somewhere in
cyberspace is a patron just waiting for you! He wears a handlebar
moustache, knee britches, shifts with a crooked index finger upon the
chain, and will certainly be loaded with cash to spend on toeclips,
brioche, and cream sherry. :P

The thing about Surly is, I just like the /name/. How apropos for a
morning commute bike.

The (steel) Marinoni Turismo is an Institution up here in canada, and
rightly & deservedly so. So is the Mariposa Randonneur.


Gorgeous stuff. The only institution down here is a For F-150.

When I eventually do Iceland, I'm gonna do it on my old,
wide-handlebar'd, hi-tens-framed, 6-spd, rigid-forked Norco Bigfoot,
with the old style canti brakes 'n all. 'Cuz I /know/ that ol' beast is
tough enough. And I've invested a lot of effort into developing a bunch
of musculature (especially in the calves) to make that weighty
sonofabitch go.


Ha--I'm very aware myself on how different cycles shape my legs into
amusingly bumpy sculptures that very from year to year. LOL I'd have to
substitute my long gone '85 Shogun Prairie Breaker for the Norco if I was
to do a tour of the Icelandic thermals.

In article ,
says...


I'm researching my next bike purchase. I already have a fully suspended
MTB and a road racer, but I want something to fill the gap. My rides
consist mostly of about 50 miles (80k) over very hilly terrain with
about 2500' (750m) of total climbing. The grades are mostly short but
steep. The MTB (with slicks) can deal with anything like dirt roads and
potholes, but it is heavy and not very good for standing up. With the
road racer I have to be picky about the road surface, cutting out a lot
of otherwise nice routes. I need a bike that is reasonably light and
that can fit decent sized tires for rougher surfaces and occasional dirt
roads. I'm thinking:

a) A fully rigid MTB with slicks

b) Cyclocross

c) Sport touring along the lines of a Rivendell Rambouillet

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

Fred Barney wrote:
I'm researching my next bike purchase. I already have a fully suspended
MTB and a road racer, but I want something to fill the gap.

It sounds to me like you really want to buy a third bike, rather than
modify an existing one.

And your description of the requirements for this bike appear to me to
be written with the image of a cyclocross bike in your mind's eye.

If you're looking for confirmation, I don't think you need it. But
yeah, buy a 'cross bike. In fact, get Habanero or Airborne to build you
a ti 'cross bike that will use up your budget and yield a reasonably
light, comfortable, versatile road/dirt machine that you can later turn
into a touring bike or commuter witout much modification (if any). (My
4-year old Airborne Carpe Diem has been a joy.)

RichC

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
David L. Johnson wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 17:43:24 -0500, Fred Barney wrote:

How about a dirt road with a 1/2 mile 20% downhill grade? I already
have road bike and I only use 25's. I love it, but it isn't always the
best choice.

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.


But a 20% grade will simply not last that long, so it really should not be
the deciding factor in the bike choice, no matter what surface.


_ The other thing to consider is that gravel and tight tire
clearances don't always go together very well. While most road
bikes can fit a 25mm tire, they don't leave enough clearance if
gravel gets stuck in the tread or for any mud at all. While I
agree that you can take a road bike with 25mm many more places
than most people are willing to try. If you are going to mostly
ride dirt roads, wider tires and clearance for fenders are pretty
handy. You can get this with either a 'cross bike, a sport
touring bike or a mtb with a rigid fork and slicks.
Pick the one that you like riding the most. Personally, I
own one of each.

_ Fat slick tires can be addictive, once you get rid of the knobs
you realize that fat tires aren't much slower ( just heavier )
and a lot more comfortable.

_ Booker C. Bense



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQuZ932TWTAjn5N/lAQEGoAQArndBgNI5T/kedBNN8LH7QXB7IY9gfs8H
tA0XdWmMKQQxqWQEuJ8EHawK+HIG2T/ll6LftrLoatSqwCAB7HE5f8qtjgCMsjKH
9Vk1XjUDaeBNmujrsQ/QHPLaZ5mzmEg5UrpFZkwCgQ3PxBzsJ74hYEWE3Dx5hT9z
qPFNzy9ML3o=
=piPd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
wrote:
Maybe something like a Surly Pacer

Rather than a cross bike.....why not just use a touring
bike such as Bruce Gordon model?

I'm asking rhetorically as I've faced same dilemma
myself. I mainly commute on my bike. But wish to do a
tour someday. Hence the indecision on what to buy.
Should it be a mt bike? A cross bike? A touring bike?
I can only afford to own ONE good bike so multiples
aren't the answer

I just wonder if you could buy a true touring bike and
put a set of 26" wheel and heavy duty tires on it. And
use it for abt anything?

- - Yes, Rivendell makes one and so does Surly[1], Thorn and
quite a few others. If you take a late 80's MTB with a
rigid fork and put drop bars on it you can get the same
thing on the cheap....

_ Booker C. Bense

[1]- Long Haul Trucker in sizes 54 and under...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQuZ+/mTWTAjn5N/lAQHPNQQAj9wdmDqxoVHVlf/dzhWTCUiDdlmVSPQH
vQ/rBvc3Z4GzBV/EJhSPXafCyRBhi1jR6LMraVPxkB2sQB7LWkCA/rdOW5aDVYlm
VvRz/vWOvNNWdfTyKwXPLUbV2mAoaALtEdAd2uocPOKKbSEHzR9jVJ2 i6QELPOja
1wXiVliOWY0=
=yktf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 18:16:00 +0000, Booker C. Bense 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.

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.

_ The other thing to consider is that gravel and tight tire clearances
don't always go together very well. While most road bikes can fit a 25mm
tire, they don't leave enough clearance if gravel gets stuck in the
tread or for any mud at all. While I agree that you can take a road bike
with 25mm many more places than most people are willing to try. If you
are going to mostly ride dirt roads, wider tires and clearance for
fenders are pretty handy.

Agreed, but again not the original idea in this thread.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all
_`\(,_ | mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so
(_)/ (_) | that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am
nothing. [1 Corinth. 13:2]

If you take a late 80's MTB with a
rigid fork and put drop bars on it you can get the same
thing on the cheap....

really?

why a late 80s model?

If things in my life fell into place the right way, I
could easily get into randonneuring. All I'd need is
a rich guy to adopt me and call me "Young Man", a la
"Magic Christian". And the bike I'd want wouldn't be
something to loonily heave-ho over fallen logs; it would
be built for relentlessly continuing along highways &
byways, and have everything necessary to keep going all
day and all night, in lots of different weather/lighting
conditions.

Question....

Do you guys think that bents might be better idea for
long touring?