Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Classic & Vintage
Reload this Page >

Spot the retrogrouch bike

Search
Notices
Classic & Vintage This forum is to discuss the many aspects of classic and vintage bicycles, including musclebikes, lightweights, middleweights, hi-wheelers, bone-shakers, safety bikes and much more.

Spot the retrogrouch bike

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-16-19, 08:39 PM
  #26  
HTupolev
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,264
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1974 Post(s)
Liked 1,298 Times in 630 Posts
Originally Posted by mstateglfr
- To the comment that a modern gravel bike is a touring bike- funny enough, I coverted my old gravel frame into a commute/touring bike. But that is only because the geometry and design happened to work well for what I want. There are many gravel bikes where the geometry is nothing like a touring bike.
I wonder what sort of touring bike we're talking about. Heavy-load road tourers like an LHT or 520 or Campeur are distinguished by their accommodations for heavy rear loads, and although these bikes are certainly capable of being taken on gravel, those accommodations are antithetical to gravel riding. Super-long chainstays in particular make it harder to keep the rear wheel planted on loose climbs, make it harder to unweight the front end on demand, and cause the rear wheel to not track the path of the front wheel as closely. (Modern MTBs tend to have chainstays that are extremely short in light of how huge the inflated wheels are!)

I wouldn't say that my Campeur pedals lively, either. It's steering is a bit like a calmed road bike thanks to a road-like trail, but deep down it's still a dump truck.

- What constitutes gravel is different from region to region, but I have never wanted to go for a gravel ride on 28mm tires and appreciate the 40-43mm tires I use. One of my road bikes has 28s that measure 31mm and they are OK to use for a couple miles of gravel from time to time, but not what I want for a metric century. More surface area and lower pressures make for a much better ride for me.
Yeah. The groomed stuff around here is mostly serviceable on 25s and fine on low-30s tires, but the rougher double-track? It's all over the map, and would often be slow and annoying on skinny tires. Sometimes it's loose and rutted, sometimes there are big rock chunks, and occasionally, it seems like the guy who was supposed to crush the rocks got a third of the way through the job and said "good enough":

HTupolev is online now  
Old 10-16-19, 09:10 PM
  #27  
mstateglfr 
Sunshine
 
mstateglfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 16,613

Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo

Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10955 Post(s)
Liked 7,485 Times in 4,187 Posts
Originally Posted by HTupolev
I wonder what sort of touring bike we're talking about. Heavy-load road tourers like an LHT or 520 or Campeur are distinguished by their accommodations for heavy rear loads, and although these bikes are certainly capable of being taken on gravel, those accommodations are antithetical to gravel riding. Super-long chainstays in particular make it harder to keep the rear wheel planted on loose climbs, make it harder to unweight the front end on demand, and cause the rear wheel to not track the path of the front wheel as closely. (Modern MTBs tend to have chainstays that are extremely short in light of how huge the inflated wheels are!)

I wouldn't say that my Campeur pedals lively, either. It's steering is a bit like a calmed road bike thanks to a road-like trail, but deep down it's still a dump truck.
Yeah, when I see dedicated touring frames converted to gravel frames I love the creativity, but question if I would like such a design as much as the gravel frames I have ridden.
Related note, my brother in law uses a 92 trek 850 that has the same mountings and I'm pretty sure is also the same geometry as the 520 from that year and it works well for him, but he doesnt ride fast/hard/far.

Along the lines of the differences in frame style/geometry, my old gravel frame turned commuter/touring bike(black mountain MC) works great for what i need but is not as heavy duty as a dedicated touring bike. It has front and rear rack mounts, fender and bottle mounts, but it also has a bit shorter chainstays than a traditional touring bike and the tubing is thinner too. I haven't loaded it up with front and rear panniers plus gear, so maybe with that weight and dispersion on the frame it would shimmy or flex a lot since it isnt really designed to handle such a load.
It's a bit of a compromise either direction you go.
mstateglfr is offline  
Old 10-16-19, 11:21 PM
  #28  
since6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Lacey, WA
Posts: 1,707

Bikes: Stevenson Custom, Stevenson Custom Tandem, Nishiki Professional

Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 367 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 196 Times in 128 Posts
Gravel bike? Hardly.

From the late 50s-through the mid-60s in the rural gravel/dirt roads of the Willamette Valley, this was a gravel bike, with lugged balloon tires.



Just remove the headlight, rear generator and lock and that's my gravel bike.

Yes the modern ones go faster, weigh a ton less, better brakes and gear choices, but this, this was freedom.

Racing a bike is, a race, but riding a bike that's a different sort of thing, on that old Schwinn I could explore a childhood.
since6 is offline  
Old 10-17-19, 06:28 AM
  #29  
mstateglfr 
Sunshine
 
mstateglfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 16,613

Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo

Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10955 Post(s)
Liked 7,485 Times in 4,187 Posts
Originally Posted by since6
Gravel bike? Hardly.
From the late 50s-through the mid-60s in the rural gravel/dirt roads of the Willamette Valley, this was a gravel bike, with lugged balloon tires.



Just remove the headlight, rear generator and lock and that's my gravel bike.
Yes the modern ones go faster, weigh a ton less, better brakes and gear choices, but this, this was freedom.
Racing a bike is, a race, but riding a bike that's a different sort of thing, on that old Schwinn I could explore a childhood.
For sure- I know where you are coming from. For me, the equivalent was a '92 GT Performer BMX. My friends and I all rode GTs and Dyno bikes(owned by GT) because we thought we were the coolest group ever and we rode all over the area to get to activities and just to go explore. We built dirt tracks in the woods, spending days on end digging up dirt to create rollers and tabletops. The bikes gave us freedom.

...but just like the singlespeed gearing of that BMX, the singlespeed of your Schwinn would have kept me from doing much exploring on the gravel I ride since I need gears to get up the hills here.
Also, I dig the friction tire light generator.
mstateglfr is offline  
Old 10-17-19, 06:41 AM
  #30  
since6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Lacey, WA
Posts: 1,707

Bikes: Stevenson Custom, Stevenson Custom Tandem, Nishiki Professional

Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 367 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 196 Times in 128 Posts
Thanks mstateglfr, but there was an ace in the hole on this bike, it did have a three speed rear hub (see the shifter on the right handlebar and cable passing through the pulley on the seat tube on its way to the rear hub), which to me was a wonder after my single speed Coast to Coast bike. Having two extra gears made a world of difference when it came to climbing or fording deep mud pot holes which often completely were across a dirt road, you would just shift down and pedal like crazy in hopes you didn't stall out in the middle of the puddle.

But even with the gears and a full speed run up some hills ended with a dismount and push to the top, my Red Wing half boot riding shoes came in handy then.
since6 is offline  
Old 10-17-19, 07:27 AM
  #31  
jeirvine 
Senior Member
 
jeirvine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Baltimore MD
Posts: 3,332

Bikes: '72 Motobecane Grand Record, '72 Gitane tandem, '72 Raleigh Super Course, '73 Raleigh Gran Sport, '73 Colnago Super, '76 Fiorelli Coppi, '78 Raleigh SBDU Team Pro, '78 Trek 930, '81 Holdsworth Special 650B, '86 Masi GC, ’94 Bridgestone RB-T

Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 786 Post(s)
Liked 520 Times in 281 Posts
Originally Posted by HTupolev
I wonder what sort of touring bike we're talking about. Heavy-load road tourers like an LHT or 520 or Campeur are distinguished by their accommodations for heavy rear loads, and although these bikes are certainly capable of being taken on gravel, those accommodations are antithetical to gravel riding. Super-long chainstays in particular make it harder to keep the rear wheel planted on loose climbs, make it harder to unweight the front end on demand, and cause the rear wheel to not track the path of the front wheel as closely. (Modern MTBs tend to have chainstays that are extremely short in light of how huge the inflated wheels are!)
Sound like a mid-70's race bike would be more the ticket: room for big tires, shorter wheelbase, slightly higher BB height. Maybe braze on some canti studs to make it more mud friendly. What am I missing? My 73 Motobecane Grand Record fits 700/35 tires.
__________________
The man who dies with the most toys…is dead. - Rootboy
jeirvine is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.