jpescatore

Yes, Jamis Renegade Escapade - pre-dates the S1/S2 nomenclature.

Only had one problem with that bike - within 2 years the carbon seat post shattered towards the end of a local ride. Jamis replaced for free, I choose an aluminum seat post rather than another carbon one, though common opinion was that the dealer had over tightened it. But you can see in the photo, a lot of the seat post is out of the tube in that frame, and I'd rather add a few grams for reliability.

I did the GAP in 2021 with that setup, a 2 day Pittsburgh to Ohiopyle, to Cumberland on day 2 ride. Worked great, had a blast - journal and photos/maps here.

On a shorter say ride ride on the GAP from Ohiopyle to West Newton last year, I ran over a sharp rock or some metal and tore a hole in the stock Donnelly MSO 40MM tires and now running 35MM Schwalbes - faster but nowhere near as plush!

imi

The only time I think about aerodynamics is when riding on the drops in strong headwinds. Makes quite a difference.

str

ok guys... ))

I love front panniers, they work great on my low trail fork. even riding on single trails, no drama, just know that you're moving on a trail. I also love biking half frame bags, handle bar bags and saddle bags, behaves by far the best!

I do definitely not care how fast I am on my lame touring bikes. Yes on the drops down, we are faster.

I will never ever ride around with 4 panniers moving my house hold around.

rivers

I can fit more water in a frame bag. I have 1 x bottle cage mount in my triangle. I can fit a 3 litre bladder (and not much else) in my frame bag. Or a 1.5 litre bladder and several other bits in my frame bag.

JSchmoyer

Hey GREAT job on the trips and the travel log write up. That's a nice website too.

Carbon seat post also gave me trouble with slippage... had to put several coats of antislip and tighten things past the torque spec to get it to stay put. (I am 195 lbs). Hope it holds.

Otherwise love the bike. Experimenting with some different tires really does change the personality.

(I wish I had it in 2x rather than 1x config tho'. I might buy a new S1 frame with the flip chip fork and buld one up!)

Duragrouch

I had to look that up. I'll be damned. I thought of the same concept some years ago to vary the trail, only my idea was simply two sets of fork dropouts, one in front and one behind the end of the fork blade; Forward for less trail when laden (touring, cargo) so steering less heavy, aft for greater trail when unladen so steering less twitchy (I ride a folder with 20" wheels). Gosh I hope adjustable trail gets adopted by folding bike makers, or an aftermarket fork with that.

JSchmoyer

Looking closely at Jamis' website it would appear these new Renegades also have a geometry tweak. For a size 56 the head tube angle went from 71.5 to 71, chainstay from
430 to 435, bottom bracket drop from 74 to 80mm. It's kinda different! They say the new frame is optimized for the 40mm tire, not 35mm. So overall a bit less "road"
and a bit more
"gravelly".

Duragrouch

Those geometry changes make sense. But AAARGH, the dreaded overused word of recent times, "gravel". Like "tactical" for anything black. "Gravel bike" sure seems to me like "drop-bar hybrid", which might be closer than "cyclo-cross".

jpescatore

I weigh 220, the savings in weight with a carbon seat post was a small percentage on bike plus rider weight!

I use the Jamis 90% for rail trail rides/tours or local trail/path riding - I have a carbon frame road bike for hillier day rides. So, I really like the 1x drivetrain on the Jamis, wouldn't really be changing the fork geometry.

The SRAM "unidirectional" shifting takes a while getting used to, probably would have preferred Shimano GRX but the SRAM components do seem more reliable/less finicky that the Ultegra Shimano components on my road bike.

JSchmoyer

Ha yeah unavoidable vernacular at this point. Jamis' own description of the new Renagade uses the word gravel. I dont mind it... it's evocative of a bike that is optimized for mixed surfaces with substantial portions of unpaved or poorly paved road and trailways.

Duragrouch

Well, if I see a bike advertised as Tactical Gravel, I'm gonna throw something.

cyccommute 

No that would be a mountain bike. A “gravel bike” is a bike that is mostly a glorified road bike that mountain biking abandoned decades ago as inefficient and uncomfortable while allowing the rider to claim that they are riding in a “more pure manner”. Kind of reminds me of the old days of single speed mountain bikes which came with their own (perceived) entitlement. Once had a woman put her handlebars in the middle of my back on a climb that offered either a steep uphill to the left or a steeper downhill to the right and told me to “move over because I’m on a single speed”. I made her wait.

I have zero issue riding my touring bike on “gravel” when necessary and have ridden hundreds of miles on a single tour including, but not limited to, the entire GAP/C&O.

Spoonrobot 

"Drop bar hybrid" is a term 30+ years out date. Almost as dead is the idea of a mountain bike as the default bike "optimized for mixed surfaces with substantial portions of unpaved or poorly paved road and trailways".

A gravel bike is it's own thing, despite the whining and consternation of the Everyman dragged into the future.

Most people don't want a mountain bike for riding what they largely perceive as types or roads, paved and unpaved. Just as mountain bike riders balk at the idea that drop bars can be ridden on singletrack and rough trail.

Similar to people that understand that touring can be done on road racing bikes...

"Leave the kitty litter panniers at home and really see the world!"

Gravel is a wonderful marketing word, the people who want it know exactly what it means. The people who want to rant and ramble will never know what it means. Perfect product differentiation and consumer engagement.

The biggest issue is that people can feel threatened by the new because their knowledge seems to be degraded in status and relevance. The nice thing about Gravel is that it has relevance to other aspects of cycling. If you know a lot about mountain bikes, then you probably know quite a bit relevant to gravel. Same if you know a lot about road riding, etc. It's not a category created from whole cloth exclusionary of what came before. It embodies many of the best aspects of other types of cycling but is balanced by it's own hubris and other faults. A refinement of what came before into a new offshoot of interesting and forgotten type of cycling.

cyccommute 

Gravel bikes are “drop bar hybrids” kind of by definition. They are supposed to be used where mountain bikes have been used but also able to be used on pavement. Sound familiar? In this 1989 Specialized catalog, Ned Overand say that it is a hybrid that is a “truly go anywhere, do anything bicycle.” Specialized uses similar verbiage now with their drop bar “hybrids” as well as their flat bar hybrids

Yea, it was 40 years ago. Nothing new to see here.

And, yet, many people are riding “drop bar hybrids” on single track and rough trail.

Poorly.

That’s what it is…marketing. I know what it means, having ridden thousands of miles of gravel on both mountain bikes and touring bikes over the last 40 years. The newbies just think they have discovered something.

Not threatened at all. I, frankly, don’t care if you or the rest of the planet want to ride a road bike on washboarded roads or downhill through rock gardens at walking speed. I might wait for you at the bottom of the hill.

Spoonrobot 

"Hybrid" started life as a marketing term for a drop bar bike that was neither road nor mountain, eventually it came to refer exclusively to flat bar bicycles. At which point "drop-bar hybrid" had to be developed to compensate for this "third" type of bike. This happened fast, 1988/89 and by 1994 "Hybrid" was known to exclusively refer to flat bars. Drop bar bicycles blending road and mountain wandered homeless of marketing category from Cross Terrain, to Cross, to eventually Cyclocross as a generic term - eventually turning into Gravel/Adventure/Etc in the early/mid-2010s.

You'll note that Mr. Overend does not refer to this bike as a "drop bar hybrid" because that phrase didn't make any sense in 1989.




Hybrid is a deprecated marketing term when referring to drop bar bicycles blending road and mountain bike features. Useless to use today, in 2024.

Drop Bar Hybrids is an even less relevant term, a creation subsequent to the term and category of Hybrids and referential to a class of bicycles after their original marketing category was discontinued.

Irrelevant. There were no great selection of 700c drop bar bikes designed for off-road unpaved riding, nor were there any selection of demi-balloon or balloon 700c tires to go along with such. What sort of 700c Gravel bikes were around in 1984? What sort of tires would our hypothetical Gravel rider be using in 1984? Remember, Gravel bikes are universally NOT 26" wheeled machines and do not use 26" tires. They use 700c tires, and drop bars. Can you name any bikes from 40 years ago that fit the bill? The Bianchi Volpe didn't come out until 1986.

The Gravel trend is a continuation of what came before in the same way that bicycles were used in both the first running of the Tour De France in 1903 and in 2024 - it does no make them the same and there's no point in undercutting the technological development that has occurred since then.

You care greatly, about many things, as we have all witnessed the lengths you will go to argue on these very forums. I care as well, but I will not put the wool in your eyes by closing my post (like you, one of thousands I have taken time to write here!) with an assertion that I do not.

What is your argument? Mine is that Gravel bikes, today, are something new and not rejected 1980s MTB standards, and not rejected Road standards. Hybrids, today, as a bike class are wholly different than Gravel bikes and the phrase "drop-bar hybrid" is meaningless. A Hybrid is designed for a specific type of riding and has specific geometry and design features that a gravel bike generally does not.

The category definition of Gravel bikes acting as a hybrid-type of bicycle between road and mountain is fine but needlessly confusing, as the industry and enthusiast preference for "gravel" has revealed. It used to be "Cyclocross" but then those bikes became too specific and the sport itself became to popular, maybe if one wonders to look, the same thing happened even earlier to Mountainbikes?

In 30 years we will look as silly as Chris Kostman fighting our imaginary battles against theoretical and conceptual encroachment on our preferred territory.

Spoonrobot 

There's also something to be said that "a blend of road and mountain" applies to road bikes as well, much more so than in the past.

Road racing bicycles now have hydraulic disc brakes as standard, wide range cassettes and their long cage derailleurs, typically smaller chainrings than were previously available, often 1x is seen, much wider tires, tubeless tires, and so on.

Enthusiast bicycles, in general, are more "hybrid" across the board than in the past.

Your box-stock road racing bike that has 700cx32mm tubeless tires, disc brakes, 11-34 cassette, 50/34 chainrings, long seatpost, is a hybrid.

In a strange twist, every bike is a gravel bike and every bike is a hybrid.

Duragrouch

Cyclo-cross bikes.

LesterOfPuppets

Even earlier than that GT called their multispeed 24" wheeled BMX bikes Hybrids.

Spoonrobot 

When? Provide the source, in addition to the close cropped screenshot, so that we may all indulge our desire to learn.

Spoonrobot 

We're all over the place in this argument, backwards and upside down in one post.

A mountain bike is optimized for mixed surfaces with substantial portions of unpaved and poorly paved roadways?



But then what is a hybrid? Oh a hybrid is a bike that can ride where mountain bikes ride but also able to be used on pavement? What?

LesterOfPuppets

Mountainbike and hybrid are both VERY vague terms. There's a reason there are about a half-dozen subgenres within each category.

From late 80s full rigid MTBs with dirt-drop setups to massive travel downhill rigs.

And comfort bike to flatbar roadbike on the hybrid side.

Then there's stuff like CX bikes which you can ride gravel on but they're not that great for it. I suppose a case could be made for calling gravel race bikes endurance CX bikes. Not many people would like to ride a 65 mile gravel course on a CX bike, the fairly steep angles and if you're lucky maybe you can squeeze some 35mm tires on it.

A lot of younger people look at full rigid MTBs and wouldn't even think to call it a mountainbike, they'd think it's a hybrid.

LesterOfPuppets

That's from the 88 catalog, I think they had them one or two years before that also.

Spoonrobot 

This is such a great find, another piece of the puzzle from the past.

I have only found the model in the 1988 catalog (not in 86/87). And 1990/91, there were actually two models in 1990: https://bmxmuseum.com/reference/2898?expanded=1#images





Yes, we are witnessing the real time differentiation in the Gravel space as well, as the bicycles become more specialized for different aspects of "gravel" riding and racing. We don't need to create more terms to muddy the water or add confusion as some sort of contrarian messaging against commodification of a new niche.

Spoonrobot 

What interesting is the "gravel" geometry for one of the original as marketed gravel bikes - the Raleigh Tamland - is very close to what some CX bikes were already at EXCEPT for the BB drop. which was around 7-12mm lower compared to some CX bikes. A significant enough factor itself, the tire clearance was another aspect. Otherwise the HTA/STA/offset/CS length and overall geometrical design was not much removed from CX at all. Gravel needed to split as the things CX racers wanted to signal their membership in the popular and growing discipline (in 2012-13-14-15) were things that were putting Gravel event participants and riders off - no water bottle cage/fender/rack brazeons, more limited tire clearance, disc/cantilever issues, etc - but they were riding as much as the CX racers on less than ideal bikes.

There was an attempt at Endurance CX called Ultra Cross but it was right on the heels of Gravel so it fell out of favor fairly quick. Three Peaks, Iron Cross, Southern Cross, etc. Ur-gravel bikes were also called Monstercross too when weighted more towards the MTB side but also applied to CX bikes when attempting to fit 40mm+ tires. I've seen a handful of "Ultra CX" bikes for sale - from custom aluminum or steel makers around that time usually in the Midwest 2009-2011ish.

LesterOfPuppets

I haven't seen any 86 or 87 GT catalogs with multispeed bikes even though GT released their first multispeed bike in 1984.

Word on the street has it that they didn't even make an 85 catalog at all. I would guess the same could be said for 84.