Originally Posted by
staehpj1
That is a scary thought. Not so much the paring down, but the notion of the least amount needed. I guess it would depend on how strictly you define need, but these days that could certainly mean getting rid 8 or 9 or however many bikes and only having one. Or if you defined need in the strictest of terms I guess I'd have none because, seriously, riding isn't a necessity, I can get around other ways and do other forms of outdoor activities like running, hiking, kayaking, canoeing, etc. all of which I also love to do. There are a couple bikes I am very attached to that I would find it very hard to part with in any case, but I could really see myself riding only one bike and being reasonably happy these days. Back in my younger days when I was racing on and off road and wanted a bike to keep on the sailboat I couldn't imagine getting by with less than three.
Hah hah! the scary game
How I see it is the least amount of bikes needed but still able to do the majority of riding that I enjoy. I tend to collect projects and have overlaps of several genres. So, for me it would be:
Road (touring and long rambly rando type rides).
Gravel (same as road)
Off road (bike packing / touring, rail riding)
Fixed gear (road / gravel)
Road and gravel could be one bike. I could add technical MTBing but would be ok with a trail bike as I get older and less willing to crash. I include the FG - it's redundant to the geared bikes but I just like the experience too much to not have one. Probably should add a commuter / beater but could use one of the others for that if I wanted to get drastic.
So, normal worse case 4 bikes. Zombie apocalypse 3.
Originally Posted by
Trevtassie
You'll be wanting a Surly Troll frame then... in has warts on the multitude of barnacles.
I've thought about it! I win the lottery or find some disposable income, buying a Straggler and ECR would fit the bill for most of my needs, with multiple wheelsets for the straggler to swap out (road, gravel, FG).