Can't ride rigid bikes anymore.
08-23-22, 08:26 AM
#76
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: northern Deep South
Posts: 8,895
Bikes: Fuji Touring, Novara Randonee
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2598 Post(s)
Liked 1,924 Times
in
1,208 Posts
Nothing wrong with riding a 129 EUR bike. Don't let these *******s bother you.
People who are riding longer distances are riding rigid bikes for efficiency. Full suspension bikes absorb energy when they bounce. When you are riding long distances, it's no longer the bumps that cause you pain. It's the effort. Bumps are painful for sure, but wasted effort is even more painful.
People who are riding longer distances are riding rigid bikes for efficiency. Full suspension bikes absorb energy when they bounce. When you are riding long distances, it's no longer the bumps that cause you pain. It's the effort. Bumps are painful for sure, but wasted effort is even more painful.
08-23-22, 11:05 PM
#77
Full Member
Join Date: Aug 2021
Location: Northeastern Oregon
Posts: 249
Bikes: 2021 Trek Verve 2 Disk
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked 119 Times
in
80 Posts
The bike's geometry doesn't change; the rider's position relative to the geometry changes. Moving your seatpost up or down or moving your saddle forward or back doesn't affect the bike's geometry at all -- imagine what geo charts would look like if they did.
But regardless, on-board changes to geometry are not necessarily a bad thing; any front- or full-suspension bike actually does have a constantly-changing geometry, and people seem to ride those without trouble.
Besides, most suspension posts have a maximum of 40mm of travel; in most conditions, only a fraction of that is actually used, and the motion is barely perceptible beyond the reduction of jarring bumps.
Try one sometime. I recommend the PNW Coast, as it doubles as a dropper. (Dropper posts don't change a bike's geometry either, btw.)
But regardless, on-board changes to geometry are not necessarily a bad thing; any front- or full-suspension bike actually does have a constantly-changing geometry, and people seem to ride those without trouble.
Besides, most suspension posts have a maximum of 40mm of travel; in most conditions, only a fraction of that is actually used, and the motion is barely perceptible beyond the reduction of jarring bumps.
Try one sometime. I recommend the PNW Coast, as it doubles as a dropper. (Dropper posts don't change a bike's geometry either, btw.)
08-23-22, 11:32 PM
#78
Banned.
The whole point of preload is the suspension only moves to soak big bumps, but not the small ones and it shouldn't move when you're pedaling.
Likes For M Rose:
08-24-22, 12:57 AM
#80
Banned.
Nothing wrong with riding a 129 EUR bike. Don't let these *******s bother you.
People who are riding longer distances are riding rigid bikes for efficiency. Full suspension bikes absorb energy when they bounce. When you are riding long distances, it's no longer the bumps that cause you pain. It's the effort. Bumps are painful for sure, but wasted effort is even more painful.
People who are riding longer distances are riding rigid bikes for efficiency. Full suspension bikes absorb energy when they bounce. When you are riding long distances, it's no longer the bumps that cause you pain. It's the effort. Bumps are painful for sure, but wasted effort is even more painful.
I used to do centuries twice a month. I only did it once without seat suspension (thinking the reduced weight would make the longs climbs easier) and didn't like it. The extra weight of the suspension post was actually worth it.
Likes For koala logs:
08-24-22, 01:43 AM
#81
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2022
Location: SW WI
Posts: 218
Bikes: Cannondale Topstone, Trek Dual Sport, State Bicycle Klunker
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked 132 Times
in
69 Posts
Thank you for your constructive post! 
Yeah I'm aware that more power mean less weight on saddle and hence less need for suspension.
Regarding efficiency, well that's an interesting subject. A few years ago, I remember finding several scientific studies which proved that a suspended fork is either more efficient or not less efficient than a rigid fork, even on roads (I should search for those studies again).
Also, I wonder if, below a certain level of comfort, efficiency also decreases in very long distance riding. One thing I know is I couldn't ride for hours on a rigid bike with narrow tires. Not only because I'd feel much less safe, but also (and mainly) for comfort.
Yeah I'm aware that more power mean less weight on saddle and hence less need for suspension.
Regarding efficiency, well that's an interesting subject. A few years ago, I remember finding several scientific studies which proved that a suspended fork is either more efficient or not less efficient than a rigid fork, even on roads (I should search for those studies again).
Also, I wonder if, below a certain level of comfort, efficiency also decreases in very long distance riding. One thing I know is I couldn't ride for hours on a rigid bike with narrow tires. Not only because I'd feel much less safe, but also (and mainly) for comfort.
Much of the suspension from simply a rough road can come from air pressure alone, however the watts spent to overcome a heavier suspension bike, and the energy the suspension consumes can be more exhausting. The frames of more premium brands of bikes are designed to absorb shock as well. Geometry makes a big difference on how your weight is positioned and reading the road and utilizing your legs for some suspension in and advantage, too. Perhaps it’s hard to wrap your mind around, but there is a reason most aren’t touring on 129.00 suspension bikes. Go to a bike shop(s) and ride some gravel/touring/endurance bikes and feel the difference, I think you will be surprised at what you feel, and actually learn.
08-24-22, 12:03 PM
#83
Senior Member
You must be unfamiliar with "preload". By adjusting preload, you can make the suspension only move for the big bumps but otherwise remain rigid for small bumps and pedaling.
I used to do centuries twice a month. I only did it once without seat suspension (thinking the reduced weight would make the longs climbs easier) and didn't like it. The extra weight of the suspension post was actually worth it.
I used to do centuries twice a month. I only did it once without seat suspension (thinking the reduced weight would make the longs climbs easier) and didn't like it. The extra weight of the suspension post was actually worth it.
Even if you have a full lock out on the suspension for road riding, that frame is still going to weigh more. There's a reason why the Tour Divide racers are not riding full suspension frames.
08-24-22, 12:07 PM
#84
Banned.
True but many do possess features only found in "proper" suspension systems like preload.
I have test ridden a folding bike with elastomer full suspension (Pacific Reach GT) on the road. It didn't have any damping but it had preload (or probably because of my little weight) and limited travel. It felt fully rigid on relatively smooth road sections. On the bumpy sections, it didn't actually bounced around because it didn't have damper. The preload and travel limiter worked like charm to keep the bike from bouncing and keep the wheels planted on the road.
The bike didn't feel any harder to pedal on the bumpy sections where the suspension soaked the bumps. If anything, it actually felt easier to power through the bumps compared to my rigid road bike.
It's not really such a bad idea, in fact, it's a great idea. The elastomer system, no spring, no damper unit was remarkably simple, aerodynamic, light, and even seem faster even on average road quality.
Of course, I doubt to expect the same quality from a $129 bike. If I'm limited to just $129 budget, I'm definitely just buying a rigid bike instead. Cheap, poorly designed suspension system would probably be too heavy and too inefficient that you may actually lose comfort over the greater effort needed to pedal it.
I have test ridden a folding bike with elastomer full suspension (Pacific Reach GT) on the road. It didn't have any damping but it had preload (or probably because of my little weight) and limited travel. It felt fully rigid on relatively smooth road sections. On the bumpy sections, it didn't actually bounced around because it didn't have damper. The preload and travel limiter worked like charm to keep the bike from bouncing and keep the wheels planted on the road.
The bike didn't feel any harder to pedal on the bumpy sections where the suspension soaked the bumps. If anything, it actually felt easier to power through the bumps compared to my rigid road bike.
It's not really such a bad idea, in fact, it's a great idea. The elastomer system, no spring, no damper unit was remarkably simple, aerodynamic, light, and even seem faster even on average road quality.
Of course, I doubt to expect the same quality from a $129 bike. If I'm limited to just $129 budget, I'm definitely just buying a rigid bike instead. Cheap, poorly designed suspension system would probably be too heavy and too inefficient that you may actually lose comfort over the greater effort needed to pedal it.
08-24-22, 12:23 PM
#85
Banned.
He's not talking about a suspension seatpost like you have. He's talking about a full suspension mountain bike.
Even if you have a full lock out on the suspension for road riding, that frame is still going to weigh more. There's a reason why the Tour Divide racers are not riding full suspension frames.
Even if you have a full lock out on the suspension for road riding, that frame is still going to weigh more. There's a reason why the Tour Divide racers are not riding full suspension frames.
But I have tested a high quality expensive full suspension folding road hybrid under 24 lbs and I actually loved it. I can't tell any difference between that and a rigid bike on smooth road sections, but on the bumpy sections, the FS bike was actually easier to pedal! If I had $2,500, I would have ordered one right away.
08-24-22, 12:45 PM
#86
Senior Member
Ofc, I'd rather have rigid bike than a ridiculously heavy FS bike.
But I have tested a high quality expensive full suspension folding road hybrid under 24 lbs and I actually loved it. I can't tell any difference between that and a rigid bike on smooth road sections, but on the bumpy sections, the FS bike was actually easier to pedal! If I had $2,500, I would have ordered one right away.
But I have tested a high quality expensive full suspension folding road hybrid under 24 lbs and I actually loved it. I can't tell any difference between that and a rigid bike on smooth road sections, but on the bumpy sections, the FS bike was actually easier to pedal! If I had $2,500, I would have ordered one right away.
https://www.specialized.com/us/en/ro...=321756-199911
08-24-22, 01:18 PM
#87
Banned.
Yes that's all very good but you have to compare the two sides at the same price level. If you spent the same 2.5 grand on a rigid bike it would be 19 lbs. Those five pounds make a difference. For example:
https://www.specialized.com/us/en/ro...=321756-199911
https://www.specialized.com/us/en/ro...=321756-199911
https://www.bikeradar.com/news/team-...paris-roubaix/
09-14-22, 06:51 PM
#88
Newbie
For the last dozen years or so, I've almost exclusively ridden a cheapo (129 EUR / USD) full suspended MTB, on which I mounted a plushy sprung saddle and slick 42mm tires.
In anticipation of future endurance rides (or possibly even credit card touring) that I'd like to try, and because common knowledge is that a full sus MTB wouldn't be the ideal bike for that, I bought an used '90s rigid MTB to modify for the purpose.
Sure, its 52mm tires and the said plushy sprung saddle which I mounted on it, make it certainly more comfortable than un upright city bike (or a road bike), and yet the full sus MTB is noticeably more comfortable.
Infact, the asphalt where I live is definitely not in good conditions. Moreover, with the full sus I can steamroll over the many speedbumps I cross.
"Duh! Of course a full sus is more comfortable than a rigid!", you are thinking. Yeah, I know. I was just wondering if there's some of you who only rides suspended bikes, with at least a suspension fork, and maybe a sprung saddle. Especially for long distance riding. I know that almost all "advanced amateurs" cyclists ride rigid bikes even for long distance riding, and I wonder how they do it. I would probably be knackered if I'd try that.
In anticipation of future endurance rides (or possibly even credit card touring) that I'd like to try, and because common knowledge is that a full sus MTB wouldn't be the ideal bike for that, I bought an used '90s rigid MTB to modify for the purpose.
Sure, its 52mm tires and the said plushy sprung saddle which I mounted on it, make it certainly more comfortable than un upright city bike (or a road bike), and yet the full sus MTB is noticeably more comfortable.
Infact, the asphalt where I live is definitely not in good conditions. Moreover, with the full sus I can steamroll over the many speedbumps I cross.
"Duh! Of course a full sus is more comfortable than a rigid!", you are thinking. Yeah, I know. I was just wondering if there's some of you who only rides suspended bikes, with at least a suspension fork, and maybe a sprung saddle. Especially for long distance riding. I know that almost all "advanced amateurs" cyclists ride rigid bikes even for long distance riding, and I wonder how they do it. I would probably be knackered if I'd try that.
09-14-22, 08:13 PM
#89
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,481
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7648 Post(s)
Liked 3,465 Times
in
1,831 Posts
Oi .... folks, "geometry" refers to the relative placement of wheels, bottom bracket, head tube and angle .... if the wheels are Moving then those relationships All change. If your F/S bike Doesn't have constantly changing geometry .... it's broken, fix it.
Yeah, lock-out and preload can reduce loss due to pedaling reactions ... but if the geometry weren't changing due to pedaling, those wouldn't need to exist, would they? Sorry, a F/S bike is going to be less efficient than a rigid because some amount of energy is going to be absorbed by the suspension ... unless the suspensions is completely frozen, in which case it is useless ... and heavy, so the overall package is less efficient (more energy in for the same work result.) let's not try to fool each other ... eh?
And yes, there are all variations, form soft-tails I recall an old moots with some sort of deflection tube where the seat stays formed a y and attached to the top of the seat tube---less than an inch of movement) and short-travel forks and all that .... and yes, for some tours, an F/S MTB is the way to go (like, when there are no roads.)
And obviously, people who choose to, can take the Old Cadillac approach ... suspension so soft the car is riding through jello, never not floating and vibrating but so gently damped that it is like riding on a boat over gentle swells. Those old Caddies were not efficient in any way (were not meant to be) and please don't try cornering with any gusto, but for eating up highway miles, they were pretty comfortable.
But let’s look at what the OP is saying:
He is foreseeing endurance rides and maybe CC touring. He is apparently planning to do all his riding on pavement. He says the asphalt is “not in good condition” but since he will be going to a lot of places (if touring) the local road conditions are not important … and I am sure plenty of us ride rigid over worse roads with no trouble …. But that is not the point.
The point is that in the first post he says he has no real experience at riding distance on a rigid bike and thinks he would be exhausted.
Of course one might suggest that dropping the heavy and only slightly effective suspension and force-absorbing tires would leave him very much less “knackered” but he doesn’t really want to hear that.
So let’s try this:
Sure @Murmur1979, you can tour on F/S. You can tour on pavement on F/S.
However, you might find that you get “knackered” because the bike is heavy more than because you are not sitting on an easy chair.
You might find that after eight or ten hours, that “comfy” saddle actually causes hot spots and eventually saddle sores, because it doesn’t support you just where you need it and rubs elsewhere. Others—many others---have found this to be true, but of course, your mileage is guaranteed to vary.
You might find that your cheap bike breaks down under extreme load and cannot be easily repaired …. Regardless of what OldTryGuy might have found with his 2002 Walmart bike (and Walmart bikes were better back then, I think we all can admit) you Might find that really cheap bikes are made from really cheap parts which cannot be replaced, and which are not up to the rigors of say, serious touring (even with a light load, as with CC touring.)
(I started hardcore daily commuting on very cheap bikes assembled from scrap and even though I did daily maintenance, the parts just didn’t survive …. Cheap metal, low tolerances meaning sloppy fit which accelerates wear, all that …. )
And you don’t want to find out your bike is broken and unfixable when you are 300 miles from home in a small town with no bike shop.
So … if you plan to tour for real, I would suggest getting a bike built to take a lot of abuse. F/S if you are willing to carry the extra weight, and if you shop wisely, you could possibly find a light hardtail with a very short shock (which you could set soft because you aren’t planning to do jumps and stunts
However …..
You will likely find that the real benefit of suspension is that it makes the big hits small---and you say yourself that hitting potholes and such unexpectedly is rare. So what is the point? Are you just afraid that you will get beat up by vibration? It is possible you have developed lazing riding habits (like planting your butt on the saddle and letting the suspension soak up everything) which will really hurt you after a few hours. Try it and see, but it isn’t the sharp shocks which will hurt, it is putting too much weight on your butt for a long time---it Will hurt.
I mean, there are a lot of folks here who have actually done tours. A lot of us have learned by trial and error … and the stuff we are suggesting you do not do is the error. You are free to chart your own course, but if I see someone whose path leads into unhappiness … yeah, I might advise an alternate route, eh?
Over time, soft saddles and full suspension don’t change the fact that you weigh what you weigh, and sitting and rubbing for hours can abrade your flesh … and if you have never gotten a saddle sore half-way through a tour—Do It. It makes for great autobiographical material: “Oh, the suffering I have had to overcome ….“
You can tour on Foot, if you want to. You can tour on a cheap bike. You can tour on a cheap F/S MTB. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
However, you might find you are happier while touring if you are willing to listen to some advice from people who have learned what not to do.
And yeah, some people will be a little snarky … but even the guy laughing about the sprung saddle, while he was deliberately being rude, was alluding to the fact that you had obviously done Zero research into why a large, padded, sprung saddle might not be the best choice for a long ride …. And still you were here defending it, as if “I like it” trumped physics and physiology.
He could have been nicer about it, but you could also have come here asking questions about stuff you didn’t know, instead of making statements about stuff you don’t know.
Anyone who has ridden several hours can tell you there is “comfortable” pedaling around the block and “comfortable” after 50-100 miles. You might know all about riding your super-plush cruiser around town at a gentle speed, but you don’t know anything about riding all day for several days in a row.
So … we will understand that you maybe didn’t think about exactly how you were coming across, and we will ask you to forgive us for some snark (not all of it ) but yeah … we have seen countless new posters coming here saying “I do it differently and all you guys are wrong if you don’t say I am right,” when those posters were wholly clueless. No excuse for bad behavior on our part, just an explanation.
And yes, some guy said “They are probably not riding $129 bikes” but he wasn’t saying $129 bikes weren’t comfortable … he was saying people weren’t using them for touring because they are, basically, $129 bikes. Not something upon which most of us would risk our health and fortune over hundreds of miles of touring.
You got hung up on the cost … but dude, whether you like it or not, most of the more expensive bikes ARE better than the Big-Box bikes you ride, for most styles of riding. (As I said, I have maybe thousands of miles on cheap bikes and they were a pain to keep working. As soon as I could I got one Good bike and didn’t have to have three in rotation to make sure I could have a bike every day.)
But it is more than just money. The guys you see riding big miles are riding quality bikes and “compliance” is not “the ability to ride off curbs while planted on the saddle.” Compliance is “the ability to damp out road shock and vibration which leads to rider fatigue while still transmitting power to the pavement do the rider can finish the day’s mileage in time to set up camp and eat and sleep.”
You have never been there or done that, so you cannot understand that. People who have been there and done that are saying, “I have been there and done that. Stop being defensive and listen to some facts.”
No one has All the facts, and no one has all the answers. You can indeed go on long tours on a super-cheap bike with inefficient and overweight suspension, and you might have a blast and everything might be fine. But folks know the odds---and odds are you will be worn out and sore and riding desperately in some pain, trying to reach the camp ground or hotel, late at night, trying to beat a rainstorm, exhausted, and wishing you hadn’t ever gone on this stupid trip …..
And next morning as you are struggling out of your room and down to the lobby, wracked with pain, with sores and swellings and bruises all over the feet and hands and buttocks, you will meet the folks who passed you on the road on their unsuspended and fully loaded touring bikes, arrived at the hotel in time for a shower before dinner, slept wonderfully, and arose fully refreshed and ready to do another 100 miles while you just want to cry.
So … if you want to tour on an F/S MTB, or a hardtail with s suspension seat post, pick the right one, and practice riding it, and have a really good time.
We’d rather hear about how good your trip was than hear that you dropped the bike in the parking lot of a convenience store, broke a cheap plastic brake lever, and found that it is not a replaceable part. We certainly don’t want you to go the route of saddle sores and suffering and wishing you hadn’t even tried.
But for sure, the choice is yours.
Yeah, lock-out and preload can reduce loss due to pedaling reactions ... but if the geometry weren't changing due to pedaling, those wouldn't need to exist, would they? Sorry, a F/S bike is going to be less efficient than a rigid because some amount of energy is going to be absorbed by the suspension ... unless the suspensions is completely frozen, in which case it is useless ... and heavy, so the overall package is less efficient (more energy in for the same work result.) let's not try to fool each other ... eh?
And yes, there are all variations, form soft-tails I recall an old moots with some sort of deflection tube where the seat stays formed a y and attached to the top of the seat tube---less than an inch of movement) and short-travel forks and all that .... and yes, for some tours, an F/S MTB is the way to go (like, when there are no roads.)
And obviously, people who choose to, can take the Old Cadillac approach ... suspension so soft the car is riding through jello, never not floating and vibrating but so gently damped that it is like riding on a boat over gentle swells. Those old Caddies were not efficient in any way (were not meant to be) and please don't try cornering with any gusto, but for eating up highway miles, they were pretty comfortable.
But let’s look at what the OP is saying:
He is foreseeing endurance rides and maybe CC touring. He is apparently planning to do all his riding on pavement. He says the asphalt is “not in good condition” but since he will be going to a lot of places (if touring) the local road conditions are not important … and I am sure plenty of us ride rigid over worse roads with no trouble …. But that is not the point.
The point is that in the first post he says he has no real experience at riding distance on a rigid bike and thinks he would be exhausted.
Of course one might suggest that dropping the heavy and only slightly effective suspension and force-absorbing tires would leave him very much less “knackered” but he doesn’t really want to hear that.
So let’s try this:
Sure @Murmur1979, you can tour on F/S. You can tour on pavement on F/S.
However, you might find that you get “knackered” because the bike is heavy more than because you are not sitting on an easy chair.
You might find that after eight or ten hours, that “comfy” saddle actually causes hot spots and eventually saddle sores, because it doesn’t support you just where you need it and rubs elsewhere. Others—many others---have found this to be true, but of course, your mileage is guaranteed to vary.
You might find that your cheap bike breaks down under extreme load and cannot be easily repaired …. Regardless of what OldTryGuy might have found with his 2002 Walmart bike (and Walmart bikes were better back then, I think we all can admit) you Might find that really cheap bikes are made from really cheap parts which cannot be replaced, and which are not up to the rigors of say, serious touring (even with a light load, as with CC touring.)
(I started hardcore daily commuting on very cheap bikes assembled from scrap and even though I did daily maintenance, the parts just didn’t survive …. Cheap metal, low tolerances meaning sloppy fit which accelerates wear, all that …. )
And you don’t want to find out your bike is broken and unfixable when you are 300 miles from home in a small town with no bike shop.
So … if you plan to tour for real, I would suggest getting a bike built to take a lot of abuse. F/S if you are willing to carry the extra weight, and if you shop wisely, you could possibly find a light hardtail with a very short shock (which you could set soft because you aren’t planning to do jumps and stunts
However …..
You will likely find that the real benefit of suspension is that it makes the big hits small---and you say yourself that hitting potholes and such unexpectedly is rare. So what is the point? Are you just afraid that you will get beat up by vibration? It is possible you have developed lazing riding habits (like planting your butt on the saddle and letting the suspension soak up everything) which will really hurt you after a few hours. Try it and see, but it isn’t the sharp shocks which will hurt, it is putting too much weight on your butt for a long time---it Will hurt.
I mean, there are a lot of folks here who have actually done tours. A lot of us have learned by trial and error … and the stuff we are suggesting you do not do is the error. You are free to chart your own course, but if I see someone whose path leads into unhappiness … yeah, I might advise an alternate route, eh?
Over time, soft saddles and full suspension don’t change the fact that you weigh what you weigh, and sitting and rubbing for hours can abrade your flesh … and if you have never gotten a saddle sore half-way through a tour—Do It. It makes for great autobiographical material: “Oh, the suffering I have had to overcome ….“
You can tour on Foot, if you want to. You can tour on a cheap bike. You can tour on a cheap F/S MTB. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
However, you might find you are happier while touring if you are willing to listen to some advice from people who have learned what not to do.
And yeah, some people will be a little snarky … but even the guy laughing about the sprung saddle, while he was deliberately being rude, was alluding to the fact that you had obviously done Zero research into why a large, padded, sprung saddle might not be the best choice for a long ride …. And still you were here defending it, as if “I like it” trumped physics and physiology.
He could have been nicer about it, but you could also have come here asking questions about stuff you didn’t know, instead of making statements about stuff you don’t know.
Anyone who has ridden several hours can tell you there is “comfortable” pedaling around the block and “comfortable” after 50-100 miles. You might know all about riding your super-plush cruiser around town at a gentle speed, but you don’t know anything about riding all day for several days in a row.
So … we will understand that you maybe didn’t think about exactly how you were coming across, and we will ask you to forgive us for some snark (not all of it
) but yeah … we have seen countless new posters coming here saying “I do it differently and all you guys are wrong if you don’t say I am right,” when those posters were wholly clueless. No excuse for bad behavior on our part, just an explanation.And yes, some guy said “They are probably not riding $129 bikes” but he wasn’t saying $129 bikes weren’t comfortable … he was saying people weren’t using them for touring because they are, basically, $129 bikes. Not something upon which most of us would risk our health and fortune over hundreds of miles of touring.
You got hung up on the cost … but dude, whether you like it or not, most of the more expensive bikes ARE better than the Big-Box bikes you ride, for most styles of riding. (As I said, I have maybe thousands of miles on cheap bikes and they were a pain to keep working. As soon as I could I got one Good bike and didn’t have to have three in rotation to make sure I could have a bike every day.)
But it is more than just money. The guys you see riding big miles are riding quality bikes and “compliance” is not “the ability to ride off curbs while planted on the saddle.” Compliance is “the ability to damp out road shock and vibration which leads to rider fatigue while still transmitting power to the pavement do the rider can finish the day’s mileage in time to set up camp and eat and sleep.”
You have never been there or done that, so you cannot understand that. People who have been there and done that are saying, “I have been there and done that. Stop being defensive and listen to some facts.”
No one has All the facts, and no one has all the answers. You can indeed go on long tours on a super-cheap bike with inefficient and overweight suspension, and you might have a blast and everything might be fine. But folks know the odds---and odds are you will be worn out and sore and riding desperately in some pain, trying to reach the camp ground or hotel, late at night, trying to beat a rainstorm, exhausted, and wishing you hadn’t ever gone on this stupid trip …..
And next morning as you are struggling out of your room and down to the lobby, wracked with pain, with sores and swellings and bruises all over the feet and hands and buttocks, you will meet the folks who passed you on the road on their unsuspended and fully loaded touring bikes, arrived at the hotel in time for a shower before dinner, slept wonderfully, and arose fully refreshed and ready to do another 100 miles while you just want to cry.
So … if you want to tour on an F/S MTB, or a hardtail with s suspension seat post, pick the right one, and practice riding it, and have a really good time.
We’d rather hear about how good your trip was than hear that you dropped the bike in the parking lot of a convenience store, broke a cheap plastic brake lever, and found that it is not a replaceable part. We certainly don’t want you to go the route of saddle sores and suffering and wishing you hadn’t even tried.
But for sure, the choice is yours.
Last edited by Maelochs; 09-14-22 at 08:19 PM.
Likes For Maelochs:
Likes For Milton Keynes:
09-15-22, 09:22 AM
#92
Veteran, Pacifist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 13,326
Bikes: Bikes??? Thought this was social media?!?
Mentioned: 284 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3897 Post(s)
Liked 4,827 Times
in
2,228 Posts
I guess I'm confused, 
I don't go on a bike ride to be comfortable.
I don't hike in the mountains to be comfortable.
I don't kayak to be comfortable.
I don't go to the gym to be comfortable.
When I sit, I wish to be comfortable.
When I sleep, I wish to be comfortable.
So,.... I just don't get this thread.
And I'm comforted and comfortable with that.
I don't go on a bike ride to be comfortable.
I don't hike in the mountains to be comfortable.
I don't kayak to be comfortable.
I don't go to the gym to be comfortable.
When I sit, I wish to be comfortable.
When I sleep, I wish to be comfortable.
So,.... I just don't get this thread.
And I'm comforted and comfortable with that.
__________________
Vintage, modern, e-road. It is a big cycling universe.
Vintage, modern, e-road. It is a big cycling universe.
Likes For Wildwood:
09-15-22, 11:42 AM
#93
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,095 Times
in
5,053 Posts
09-15-22, 11:53 AM
#94
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,095 Times
in
5,053 Posts
In the last several years, I've learned I can ride 100 miles on just about any bike with halfways decent tires. I don't recommend doing that to other people, but I certainly get annoyed when I read that "it's impossible to do x on y" when I've done "x on y" several times. OP will learn whether or not this works for them, it's not for anyone else to say.
09-15-22, 12:01 PM
#95
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,481
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7648 Post(s)
Liked 3,465 Times
in
1,831 Posts
I have heard that there have been people who walked across Niagara Falls on a wire .... but for some reason when I suggest that anyone could do that, people act like I am crazy.
