dualresponse

Thanks for these links. I spent the morning going through this, and some of the bikes I'm looking at are on this list.

For many years, I was the old school roadie with my steel frames. I resisted change, but finally changed to an AL/carbon seatstay frame, and later full carbon frames. In terms of road ride quality, there was no comparison. The newer frames were lighter, stiffer, and more comfortable. For the 700x23 roadie, they were simply better. Would this entirely translate into the same winning impression with wider low pressure tires? I don't know, but I'd be willing to find out.

My "gravel" bike- a frankenbike steel 26' mtb and 700c wheels has been loyal, but has always suffered, from old worn spare parts "itis", with worn chainrings, sloppy derailleurs, and a pieced together feel. It has beaten me to death on gravel road washboard. I have experimented with softride stems, and hybrid forks, rebuilding some into longer travel magic carpet ride beast, and even larger tires at lower pressures, which still cannot respond to the high frequency of the washboard.

One of these newfangles gismos could address at least some of my concerns- short wheelbase for better climbing, disc, for the steep descents out here (20%+ extended grades which eventually cup out the sides of my rims on my rimbrake bikes), and perhaps... just perhaps.. .a little better dampening from the carbon on the gravel washboards of death.

This leaves me considering a gravel type bike. Even looking at some pricey models $5-6k plus, I'm only semi- impressed. They are expensive, and don't have the gear ranges someone in the mountains (actually loaded and touring) would need. As one goes up in price towards the higher models, the rims become nice lightweight trinkets, great for racing, but not something one would want to seriously tour on loaded (approx 1200-1300 grams for one set?- lighter than my zipp 202's).

Looking recently at the models the bike shops stock, the carbon rack attachments appear to incorporated, some, with more thought than others. A rockymountain fork has attachments, but they point forward at 20 degrees, suitable perhaps for a bottle cage, but not easily mounting a front rack. A niner rdo has rear rack attachments, but they are incorporated into a super slim seatstays, more designed as a flexible CF shock absorber than a rigid mounting point. The Trek bikes list all their AL/and carbon frames weight limits at 275lbs. Since all of their frames have the same spec, it looks like someone picked a number, somehow, but not necessarily by testing a frame loaded with gear.

Fortunately, at this point, as much as I want to bike the bullet and buy something, the sobering reality is that I'd just be tinkering again, swapping stuff out, redoing drivetrains to find lower gear inches, and building new rimsets for specific task.

I think for light/ credit card touring on relatively flat ground the current crop of gravel/adventure bikes potentially could be great. I think a custom carbon frame built up for a specific task could be great, but most of these bikes seemed to be aimed at checking off as many boxes as possible to appeal to the masses. Cyclocross.. Gravel Riders..adventure riders..light tourers..

I think the market needs to sort itself out some more.

For a hardcore tourer? I don't know, maybe, maybe not. I might be buying one as a gravel racing/cyclocross rig, with potentially mounting some extra bottles for longer rides. Keeping it light not to have to mess with gearing. I think in that capacity, it might be great.- and if I do get one, I sure as heck am going to be putting racks on it to experiment!