Why is Gravel Riding Such a Thing?
#226
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Ashland, VA
Posts: 4,420
Bikes: The keepers: 1958 Raleigh Lenton Grand Prix, 1968 Ranger, 1969 Magneet Sprint, 1971 Gitane Tour de France, 1973 Raleigh Tourist, 3 - 1986 Rossins, and a '77 PX-10 frame in process.
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 221 Post(s)
Liked 237 Times
in
129 Posts
The whole "gravel bikes are a marketing exercise" isn't really fair. Any bike can be a gravel bike but if you're doing five hour rides on surfaces that are rougher than pavement but not as rough as singletrack, you want a bike fit for the purpose. Depending on where you live, you might be surrounded by lots of gravel roads and have a genuine need for such a bike. That's true for me here outside of Chicago. Also, gravel bikes are just more practical road bikes: more robust, wider tires, more relaxed geometry, lots of mounts etc. They make a lot of sense even if you're not riding gravel.
As a sidenote, I've noticed that people who say gravel bikes are just a marketing ploy simply don't have access to gravel roads themselves. They don't need one, so they assume no one needs one. This is particularly true of UK cyclists online, in my experience.
As a sidenote, I've noticed that people who say gravel bikes are just a marketing ploy simply don't have access to gravel roads themselves. They don't need one, so they assume no one needs one. This is particularly true of UK cyclists online, in my experience.
Every other 'advancement' out there is sheer marketing. Mountain bikes, 26, 27.5, 29 wheels, if you're just riding like the majority of MTB riders out there, the wheel size really doesn't matter all that much. But the manufacturers gotta get your completely dissatisfied with your current MTB at least once every 5-7 years. Bottom brackets. Once again unless you're racing and critically worried about weight, the old Stronglight invented square-end bottom bracket serves just as well as BB30 or whatever the newest flavor. Hell, for that matter, just how much more does 11 cogs on the rear give you over 7? I've noticed now that the style is going to single chainwheels, guess that's a good justification for 11 on the rear. Carbon fiber frames? I've ridden more than a few, and with my age (71) riding style and level of fitness (I can still do centuries) they're a complete waste to me. I prefer steel, and fully understand that aluminum came about with the primary intention of lowering production costs.
Electric shifting - now that's the one that does not make sense to me in the slightest. Yes, I fully understand the concept, operation, and reason for it. I also realize that the only people who need that kind of stuff are riders under a team contract who don't have to buy their bikes, they're team issue. But boy, are they marketed to the Sunday riding dentists and accountants. (Me? I built myself an aluminum framed Mavic neutral support bike replica.). And if there's anything that goes against the inherent simplicity of the bicycle, that's it.
Enough soapbox. I'm an old man who walked to school uphill both ways in the snow. And still looks with wry humor at most of the 'improvements' that show up every year.
__________________
Syke
“No one in this world, so far as I know — and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me — has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.”
H.L. Mencken, (1926)
Syke
“No one in this world, so far as I know — and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me — has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.”
H.L. Mencken, (1926)
#227
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,210
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2762 Post(s)
Liked 2,537 Times
in
1,433 Posts
Gravel bikes are a cynical marketing experiment where bicycles companies try to sell bikes that people like to ride.
Likes For Kapusta:
#228
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,434
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4409 Post(s)
Liked 4,861 Times
in
3,007 Posts
The comment may be sharpish and not fair, but it's not untrue. Let's be honest, for a bicycle company to survive, if not thrive, they constantly have to come up with something new to get the customer back in their store. And, quite frankly, probably every 'improvement' made in bicycle technology since the double-barreled introduction in index shifting and brifters has been overkill for the average (non-racing) cyclist. OK, I'm one of the old curmudgeons. The newest road bike that I own is a 1992 Diamondback Expert, non-lugged steel with a horizontal top tube, Shimano RSX 3x7 drivetrain. Over the past fifteen years I've owned a bit fancier (the most exotic I've ever owned is an aluminum frame with carbon fork and carbon rear stays, 2x9 Shimano Ultegra, running sewups on 32 spoke alloy rims),but right now, all my other road bikes are downtube shifters, half of which are friction. My one mountain bike is steel, 3x8, hardtail with a suspension fork and V-brakes. Ok, I'll put disc brakes almost up there with indexing and brifters.
Every other 'advancement' out there is sheer marketing. Mountain bikes, 26, 27.5, 29 wheels, if you're just riding like the majority of MTB riders out there, the wheel size really doesn't matter all that much. But the manufacturers gotta get your completely dissatisfied with your current MTB at least once every 5-7 years. Bottom brackets. Once again unless you're racing and critically worried about weight, the old Stronglight invented square-end bottom bracket serves just as well as BB30 or whatever the newest flavor. Hell, for that matter, just how much more does 11 cogs on the rear give you over 7? I've noticed now that the style is going to single chainwheels, guess that's a good justification for 11 on the rear. Carbon fiber frames? I've ridden more than a few, and with my age (71) riding style and level of fitness (I can still do centuries) they're a complete waste to me. I prefer steel, and fully understand that aluminum came about with the primary intention of lowering production costs.
Electric shifting - now that's the one that does not make sense to me in the slightest. Yes, I fully understand the concept, operation, and reason for it. I also realize that the only people who need that kind of stuff are riders under a team contract who don't have to buy their bikes, they're team issue. But boy, are they marketed to the Sunday riding dentists and accountants. (Me? I built myself an aluminum framed Mavic neutral support bike replica.). And if there's anything that goes against the inherent simplicity of the bicycle, that's it.
Enough soapbox. I'm an old man who walked to school uphill both ways in the snow. And still looks with wry humor at most of the 'improvements' that show up every year.
Every other 'advancement' out there is sheer marketing. Mountain bikes, 26, 27.5, 29 wheels, if you're just riding like the majority of MTB riders out there, the wheel size really doesn't matter all that much. But the manufacturers gotta get your completely dissatisfied with your current MTB at least once every 5-7 years. Bottom brackets. Once again unless you're racing and critically worried about weight, the old Stronglight invented square-end bottom bracket serves just as well as BB30 or whatever the newest flavor. Hell, for that matter, just how much more does 11 cogs on the rear give you over 7? I've noticed now that the style is going to single chainwheels, guess that's a good justification for 11 on the rear. Carbon fiber frames? I've ridden more than a few, and with my age (71) riding style and level of fitness (I can still do centuries) they're a complete waste to me. I prefer steel, and fully understand that aluminum came about with the primary intention of lowering production costs.
Electric shifting - now that's the one that does not make sense to me in the slightest. Yes, I fully understand the concept, operation, and reason for it. I also realize that the only people who need that kind of stuff are riders under a team contract who don't have to buy their bikes, they're team issue. But boy, are they marketed to the Sunday riding dentists and accountants. (Me? I built myself an aluminum framed Mavic neutral support bike replica.). And if there's anything that goes against the inherent simplicity of the bicycle, that's it.
Enough soapbox. I'm an old man who walked to school uphill both ways in the snow. And still looks with wry humor at most of the 'improvements' that show up every year.
Just picking one example. Moving from my 2004 26" mtb to a 2014 29" (both full suspension trail bikes intended for the same use) the improvement was so dramatic (not just because of the wheel size - geometry, weight, gearing, shifting, braking all much improved) that I've never fallen off it ever since and I was regularly crashing on my old bike. I've since moved to a 2019 mtb and the difference there was far more subtle, but still better nonetheless. The newer bike is a good few pounds lighter and I beat all my previous PRs on it within a couple of weeks, clearing a few climbs that I would often fail on the older 29.
Road bikes I've owned quite a few right back to the early 80s. I now ride modern carbon endurance bikes and they are the best I've ever ridden over the years. Fast, smooth, quiet, comfortable. Really nothing to complain about. A couple of years ago I went on holiday to a friend's villa and he had an early 2000s Trek carbon bike there which I borrowed to explore the local hills. Top spec DuraAce drivetrain, no expense spared Project One build. This was the best of the best from that era. It rode like s*** compared to my 2019 Giant Defy. Quite shocking in fact. Yet I don't remember road bikes of that era being so relatively crap to ride. It's just that the newer ones didn't exist back in the day, so there was no direct comparison.
Just sayin.... it's not a simple case of marketing over substance.
Likes For PeteHski:
#229
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,210
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2762 Post(s)
Liked 2,537 Times
in
1,433 Posts
Every other 'advancement' out there is sheer marketing. Mountain bikes, 26, 27.5, 29 wheels, if you're just riding like the majority of MTB riders out there, the wheel size really doesn't matter all that much. But the manufacturers gotta get your completely dissatisfied with your current MTB at least once every 5-7 years. Bottom brackets. Once again unless you're racing and critically worried about weight, the old Stronglight invented square-end bottom bracket serves just as well as BB30 or whatever the newest flavor. Hell, for that matter, just how much more does 11 cogs on the rear give you over 7? I've noticed now that the style is going to single chainwheels, guess that's a good justification for 11 on the rear. Carbon fiber frames? I've ridden more than a few, and with my age (71) riding style and level of fitness (I can still do centuries) they're a complete waste to me. I prefer steel, and fully understand that aluminum came about with the primary intention of lowering production costs.
.
.
Likes For Kapusta:
#230
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,434
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4409 Post(s)
Liked 4,861 Times
in
3,007 Posts
You picked the wrong example to make your point. Whether or not you SHOULD buy a new MTB every 5-7 years is up to you, but in the 24 years that I have been riding mountain bikes off road, the the advancements in any 5-7 year period are real and easily noticed on the trail by pretty much any rider. Taking a bike from 2000, 2010 and 2020, the leap between each is massive and game changing on the trail.
Likes For PeteHski:
#231
Full Member
Call it gravel riding/off road / downhill whatever. I won't ride on the streets anymore. I dont care how many "Rights" I have or how much in the right I am If I ride in town I'll ride on the sidewalk, take my time and deal with pedestrians vs any mindless idiot driving a Hyundai or larger while dicking around on their phone and not seeing me.
Likes For JehD:
#232
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 4,083
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2333 Post(s)
Liked 2,097 Times
in
1,314 Posts
Call it gravel riding/off road / downhill whatever. I won't ride on the streets anymore. I dont care how many "Rights" I have or how much in the right I am If I ride in town I'll ride on the sidewalk, take my time and deal with pedestrians vs any mindless idiot driving a Hyundai or larger while dicking around on their phone and not seeing me.
Likes For GhostRider62:
#233
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 786
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 338 Post(s)
Liked 408 Times
in
252 Posts
There's just not much "ideal" gravel bike ground to be had around here; we have fire roads criss-crossing the hills, but they have a tendency to be a bit too gnarly and rocky to be comfortably doable on a gravel bike. There are some gravel routes behind the mountains but it requires a lot of riding on the road to get there. That said, I did run into some really nice gravel yesterday on my road bike, as I decided to go exploring since I really wasn't feeling up to doing anything more intensive on the bike (most likely Omicron doing the rounds), and I was instantly reminded why gravel bikes are cool; even on relatively nice gravel like this one, a gravel bike with 32mm + tires is just faster and you have better control in looser patches than with 25s which just sink in.
Well, this was interesting; a line of statues and benches roughly in the middle of nowhere.
But I still got some fresh air and enjoyed some winter sunshine
Well, this was interesting; a line of statues and benches roughly in the middle of nowhere.
But I still got some fresh air and enjoyed some winter sunshine
#234
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,434
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4409 Post(s)
Liked 4,861 Times
in
3,007 Posts
Once you move to 28 mm or wider road tyres it becomes less and less of an issue to ride on these nice gravel roads. I can't say I miss 25 mm road tyres at all.
#235
Newbie
I like the adventure that Gravel brings. Plus the bikes look so cool!
Likes For zachfromkc:
#236
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: northWET washington
Posts: 1,197
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 383 Post(s)
Liked 690 Times
in
396 Posts
A fairly large part of the shift in sentiment has come from people realizing that a more versatile road bike doesn't need to make as dramatic compromises in road performance as they thought. Historically, road drivetrains have typically been built excessively high and/or narrow for most people using them. And tire width does not, in and of itself, hurt performance as much as people usually guess.
It's hard to give a single universal answer. In any given area where gravel bikes are popular, if you look at what people are using them for, you'll probably find reasons that people like them.
Over here it's mostly because of the networks of gravel roads sprawled throughout the foothills. There are steep sustained gradients demanding low gears, and surfaces are often rough, but it usually doesn't get technical enough to really demand a mountain bike. And if you're doing mixed-surface rides that also incorporate paved riding in the shallower hills or flat valleys, it's very attractive to avoid the MTB. Put another way, there's lots of good road riding that I wouldn't want to take a skinny-tired road bike on.
It's hard to give a single universal answer. In any given area where gravel bikes are popular, if you look at what people are using them for, you'll probably find reasons that people like them.
Over here it's mostly because of the networks of gravel roads sprawled throughout the foothills. There are steep sustained gradients demanding low gears, and surfaces are often rough, but it usually doesn't get technical enough to really demand a mountain bike. And if you're doing mixed-surface rides that also incorporate paved riding in the shallower hills or flat valleys, it's very attractive to avoid the MTB. Put another way, there's lots of good road riding that I wouldn't want to take a skinny-tired road bike on.
Likes For kahn:
#237
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 25 miles northwest of Boston
Posts: 29,549
Bikes: Bottecchia Sprint, GT Timberline 29r, Marin Muirwoods 29er, Trek FX Alpha 7.0
Mentioned: 112 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5224 Post(s)
Liked 3,581 Times
in
2,342 Posts
#238
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: northWET washington
Posts: 1,197
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 383 Post(s)
Liked 690 Times
in
396 Posts
This is why:
A bike should create riding opportunities, not specifically limit them. With few exceptions, road bikes up to the early/mid 2000s were completely impractical toys - a max tire width of 25mm, as was common, is completely useless for gravel, and as you pointed out, not great on imperfect pavement. A gravel bike is just a road bike with better brakes and room for reasonably wide tires, which means you can ride pretty much anywhere. A full suspension MTB is capable more because of the 2.2" wide tires than because of suspension - 99% of the routes I rode on my rigid MTB in the 80s and 90s I can ride on my gravel bike (although a bit faster), and 100% of the trails I can ride on my FS mountain bike I can ride on my old rigid mountain bike (although a bit slower)
The other thing about gravel bikes is that they are just a tire change away from being as fast as a dedicated road bike. A spare set of wheels means you essentially have two bikes if you are willing to flip some QR levers open.
A bike should create riding opportunities, not specifically limit them. With few exceptions, road bikes up to the early/mid 2000s were completely impractical toys - a max tire width of 25mm, as was common, is completely useless for gravel, and as you pointed out, not great on imperfect pavement. A gravel bike is just a road bike with better brakes and room for reasonably wide tires, which means you can ride pretty much anywhere. A full suspension MTB is capable more because of the 2.2" wide tires than because of suspension - 99% of the routes I rode on my rigid MTB in the 80s and 90s I can ride on my gravel bike (although a bit faster), and 100% of the trails I can ride on my FS mountain bike I can ride on my old rigid mountain bike (although a bit slower)
The other thing about gravel bikes is that they are just a tire change away from being as fast as a dedicated road bike. A spare set of wheels means you essentially have two bikes if you are willing to flip some QR levers open.
Years ago I guess I did a few gravel rides on my 10 speed Peugeot road bike. It certainly took a beating but we did about 40 or so miles of which probably half was a forest service road over Jack's Pass north of Hwy 2 looping around using Hwy 2. I can remember another one like that although I don't recall its name but it was out of Duvall. The tire was probably a 23 back then. And I am talking 30 or so years back (when I did stupid things like that)
So now they design bikes for that abuse and give them a name/type.
Likes For kahn:
#239
Senior Member
Likes For HTupolev:
Likes For Branko D:
#241
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Posts: 4,624
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2975 Post(s)
Liked 1,182 Times
in
771 Posts
That and I can fit 40c tires on it. Disc brakes another major upgrade over previous road bikes.
Likes For prj71:
#242
Seńor Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,066
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 649 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times
in
215 Posts
Why Gravel Riding is Such a Thing
This is why.
A few years ago, I moved from a small town that was penned in on three sides by government facilities and the fourth side by a river. There was literally ONE paved route that was reasonable for road cycling. I moved to another town with a few more cyclable road routes. Even then, the variety of cycling options was limited if you stayed on the tarmac.
The sign in the picture is a few kms down an unmaintained road, and I think you'd have to walk a good portion of the approach to the sign if you were on a 'road' bike. From the sign to about 5km later (where the 'rough road' intersects with a regional highway) the road is not rideable on a road bike, not including the first few meters visible past the sign.
A gravel bike fits and rides like a slightly heavy road bike, and cruises almost as fast on pavement, but also allows access to infinitely more routes that most wouldn't even consider riding on a skinny tired bike.
OP posted a response to his own thread, possibly for snark, saying he never realized his '70s Schwinn 10 speed was actually a gravel bike. Well, it is. The only drawbacks many old 10 speeds had were weak steel rims and terrible brakes, but many had clearance for 1-3/8" wide tires, which are sufficient for a lot of rough surface riding. If you upgrade to 700c wheels on a lot of those bikes, you could easily fit 38 or even 40mm wide tires, which absolutely made them appropriate for gravel riding.
Likes For Wilfred Laurier:
#243
OM boy
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,368
Bikes: a bunch
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 517 Post(s)
Liked 644 Times
in
438 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sykerocker View Post
The comment may be sharpish and not fair, but it's not untrue. Let's be honest, for a bicycle company to survive, if not thrive, they constantly have to come up with something new to get the customer back in their store. And, quite frankly, probably every 'improvement' made in bicycle technology since the double-barreled introduction in index shifting and brifters has been overkill for the average (non-racing) cyclist. OK, I'm one of the old curmudgeons. ...
...Electric shifting - now that's the one that does not make sense to me in the slightest. Yes, I fully understand the concept, operation, and reason for it. I also realize that the only people who need that kind of stuff are riders under a team contract who don't have to buy their bikes, they're team issue. But boy, are they marketed to the Sunday riding dentists and accountants. (Me? I built myself an aluminum framed Mavic neutral support bike replica.). And if there's anything that goes against the inherent simplicity of the bicycle, that's it.
Enough soapbox. I'm an old man who walked to school uphill both ways in the snow. And still looks with wry humor at most of the 'improvements' that show up every year.
The 'Universe' is expanding, not just our overall space, but in line, all of our spaces, including cycling.
As another 'old guy', I'm good with the expansion. Since my intro into the cycling universe, it has become far broader, more interesting, and certainly far more attainable for everyone.
True for everything which I have interest in.
The modern cycling universe has been, literally, a fountain of youth for me. I can ride places and ways I did over 10 years ago. True for all the activities I do.
Yes, marketing plays heavily into the 'product' game - but that's an area for each of us to decide what is applicable to ourselves.
You make your decisions, I can make mine.
"Gravel' is the inevitable 'bridge' between other areas - a rainbow of possibilities, available to each/all of us. From 'Danny Mac' to Filippo Ganna, from BMX to my grandson on his 'pushbike' when he was 2.
One isn't required to 'buy' into any color of cycling, often we can blend into a color, by adapting something we already have.
I suggest taking one of your 'old' bikes and adapting it to some other purpose - lets pick 'Gravel' - the modern universe (of parts) is broad enough to make that easily accessible.
'Gravel'/trail availability is varied and more or less accessible, depending on your area and comfort. But very importantly, it is still a major separation for us cyclists from the increasingly more dangerous world of motorized cages piloted by unaware and unconcerned 'motorists'. A major consideration for many of us.
I've always liked/enjoyed lots of light, big windows - I say choose the biggest window on the world which you're comfortable with...
Ride On
Yuri
Originally Posted by sykerocker View Post
The comment may be sharpish and not fair, but it's not untrue. Let's be honest, for a bicycle company to survive, if not thrive, they constantly have to come up with something new to get the customer back in their store. And, quite frankly, probably every 'improvement' made in bicycle technology since the double-barreled introduction in index shifting and brifters has been overkill for the average (non-racing) cyclist. OK, I'm one of the old curmudgeons. ...
...Electric shifting - now that's the one that does not make sense to me in the slightest. Yes, I fully understand the concept, operation, and reason for it. I also realize that the only people who need that kind of stuff are riders under a team contract who don't have to buy their bikes, they're team issue. But boy, are they marketed to the Sunday riding dentists and accountants. (Me? I built myself an aluminum framed Mavic neutral support bike replica.). And if there's anything that goes against the inherent simplicity of the bicycle, that's it.
Enough soapbox. I'm an old man who walked to school uphill both ways in the snow. And still looks with wry humor at most of the 'improvements' that show up every year.
Just because you enjoy riding old bikes, doesn't make newer ones all marketing bs.
Just picking one example. Moving from my 2004 26" mtb to a 2014 29" (both full suspension trail bikes intended for the same use) the improvement was so dramatic (not just because of the wheel size - geometry, weight, gearing, shifting, braking all much improved) that I've never fallen off it ever since and I was regularly crashing on my old bike. I've since moved to a 2019 mtb and the difference there was far more subtle, but still better nonetheless. The newer bike is a good few pounds lighter and I beat all my previous PRs on it within a couple of weeks, clearing a few climbs that I would often fail on the older 29.
Road bikes I've owned quite a few right back to the early 80s. I now ride modern carbon endurance bikes and they are the best I've ever ridden over the years. Fast, smooth, quiet, comfortable. Really nothing to complain about. A couple of years ago I went on holiday to a friend's villa and he had an early 2000s Trek carbon bike there which I borrowed to explore the local hills. Top spec DuraAce drivetrain, no expense spared Project One build. This was the best of the best from that era. It rode like s*** compared to my 2019 Giant Defy. Quite shocking in fact. Yet I don't remember road bikes of that era being so relatively crap to ride. It's just that the newer ones didn't exist back in the day, so there was no direct comparison.
Just sayin.... it's not a simple case of marketing over substance.
Just picking one example. Moving from my 2004 26" mtb to a 2014 29" (both full suspension trail bikes intended for the same use) the improvement was so dramatic (not just because of the wheel size - geometry, weight, gearing, shifting, braking all much improved) that I've never fallen off it ever since and I was regularly crashing on my old bike. I've since moved to a 2019 mtb and the difference there was far more subtle, but still better nonetheless. The newer bike is a good few pounds lighter and I beat all my previous PRs on it within a couple of weeks, clearing a few climbs that I would often fail on the older 29.
Road bikes I've owned quite a few right back to the early 80s. I now ride modern carbon endurance bikes and they are the best I've ever ridden over the years. Fast, smooth, quiet, comfortable. Really nothing to complain about. A couple of years ago I went on holiday to a friend's villa and he had an early 2000s Trek carbon bike there which I borrowed to explore the local hills. Top spec DuraAce drivetrain, no expense spared Project One build. This was the best of the best from that era. It rode like s*** compared to my 2019 Giant Defy. Quite shocking in fact. Yet I don't remember road bikes of that era being so relatively crap to ride. It's just that the newer ones didn't exist back in the day, so there was no direct comparison.
Just sayin.... it's not a simple case of marketing over substance.
As another 'old guy', I'm good with the expansion. Since my intro into the cycling universe, it has become far broader, more interesting, and certainly far more attainable for everyone.
True for everything which I have interest in.
The modern cycling universe has been, literally, a fountain of youth for me. I can ride places and ways I did over 10 years ago. True for all the activities I do.
Yes, marketing plays heavily into the 'product' game - but that's an area for each of us to decide what is applicable to ourselves.
You make your decisions, I can make mine.
"Gravel' is the inevitable 'bridge' between other areas - a rainbow of possibilities, available to each/all of us. From 'Danny Mac' to Filippo Ganna, from BMX to my grandson on his 'pushbike' when he was 2.
One isn't required to 'buy' into any color of cycling, often we can blend into a color, by adapting something we already have.
I suggest taking one of your 'old' bikes and adapting it to some other purpose - lets pick 'Gravel' - the modern universe (of parts) is broad enough to make that easily accessible.
'Gravel'/trail availability is varied and more or less accessible, depending on your area and comfort. But very importantly, it is still a major separation for us cyclists from the increasingly more dangerous world of motorized cages piloted by unaware and unconcerned 'motorists'. A major consideration for many of us.
I've always liked/enjoyed lots of light, big windows - I say choose the biggest window on the world which you're comfortable with...
Ride On
Yuri
Likes For cyclezen:
#244
Grupetto Bob
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Seattle-ish
Posts: 6,218
Bikes: Bikey McBike Face
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2582 Post(s)
Liked 5,639 Times
in
2,921 Posts
I have several pals whom ride gravel, because we are lucky to have tons of trails. They also mountain and road bike, so they are all-around cyclists which is pretty cool exploring some of the more popular facets of cycling. We have the luxury of deciding which discipline to do depending on weather, season or whim. But find it rather amusing how some ‘pure’ cyclists of one discipline tend to denigrate the others without experiencing them. Such are humans.
Another thought is that I find drop bars rather curious on gravel bikes. How often when gravel riding does one go for an aero position to maximize speed? Maybe in a prevailing headwind, but how common is that? I know on my road bikes I will use the drops for a change for in position or in a stiff head wind but more recent studies have shown having forearms parallel to the top bar on the drops is more aero. So are drops just a cool factor or will it evolve to a flat/straight bar? Inquiring “snarks” want to know.
__________________
Road 🚴🏾♂️ & Mountain 🚵🏾♂️
Road 🚴🏾♂️ & Mountain 🚵🏾♂️
#245
Senior Member
but more recent studies have shown having forearms parallel to the top bar on the drops is more aero.
So are drops just a cool factor
#246
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,949
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3952 Post(s)
Liked 7,297 Times
in
2,947 Posts
I frequently ride in the drops for better control when descending on gravel. And, being aero never hurts -- in my last gravel race I spent more than an hour above 25 mph, and topped out at 46 mph.
Likes For tomato coupe:
#247
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,760
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1109 Post(s)
Liked 1,200 Times
in
760 Posts
Hey, I resemble that remark! But rest assured, that was more of a light bulb moment, albeit dim, than anything.
I have several pals whom ride gravel, because we are lucky to have tons of trails. They also mountain and road bike, so they are all-around cyclists which is pretty cool exploring some of the more popular facets of cycling. We have the luxury of deciding which discipline to do depending on weather, season or whim. But find it rather amusing how some ‘pure’ cyclists of one discipline tend to denigrate the others without experiencing them. Such are humans.
Another thought is that I find drop bars rather curious on gravel bikes. How often when gravel riding does one go for an aero position to maximize speed? Maybe in a prevailing headwind, but how common is that? I know on my road bikes I will use the drops for a change for in position or in a stiff head wind but more recent studies have shown having forearms parallel to the top bar on the drops is more aero. So are drops just a cool factor or will it evolve to a flat/straight bar? Inquiring “snarks” want to know.
I have several pals whom ride gravel, because we are lucky to have tons of trails. They also mountain and road bike, so they are all-around cyclists which is pretty cool exploring some of the more popular facets of cycling. We have the luxury of deciding which discipline to do depending on weather, season or whim. But find it rather amusing how some ‘pure’ cyclists of one discipline tend to denigrate the others without experiencing them. Such are humans.
Another thought is that I find drop bars rather curious on gravel bikes. How often when gravel riding does one go for an aero position to maximize speed? Maybe in a prevailing headwind, but how common is that? I know on my road bikes I will use the drops for a change for in position or in a stiff head wind but more recent studies have shown having forearms parallel to the top bar on the drops is more aero. So are drops just a cool factor or will it evolve to a flat/straight bar? Inquiring “snarks” want to know.
One difference I've seen (but didn't do when I built up my and my wife's bikes last spring) is to go with wider drop bars. The idea is that on rough roads, just like with mountain bikes, a wider bar helps with control vs. the narrow road bike bar where there aren't surface irregularities. I went with our normal width bars - mainly because I had them on hand. But since I'm obligated to spend money on SOMETHING every year, I think I might buy some 2-4cm wider bars.
Last edited by Camilo; 02-04-22 at 11:38 PM.
Likes For Camilo:
Likes For guijs: