[Steve]

@hozn 90740 wrote:

There must be a typo on their specs page when they say that 700×42 fit with fenders on that frame. They must mean 650×42. As mstone says, that sounds like it would be the same frame (as the regular straggler). Running 700c tires on a 650B frame is an odd suggestion. Of course nothing to stop you putting 650B wheels on the 700c (disc) frame. I considered doing that with my off-road commuter wheelset so I could run proper 2.0 MTB tires, but in reality 700×45 is plenty big for my off-road needs (for that bike).

Or what Hozn said. I had skimmed it. Looks like a typo probably.

[Steve]

@mstone 90737 wrote:

I’m pondering what, exactly, you need to do to a disc frame to make it fit 650b as an option to 700c. This sounds more like a brilliant marketing move than anything, and maybe just a wheel option if you buy a complete bike.

I’m not the smartest person on this stuff, but perhaps just they chose more inbetween hights/distances/gapping for the geometry. Like a bike designed for 650b normally might not fit a 700c wheel due to clearances around the fork and stays, but even if those were fine, the 700c might raise the bike up to a poor handling bottom bracket height, too much toe overlap, or other unintended changes. With disc brakes and surly tire clerance, it seems like you could always go for 700c or 650b, but some of those other issues might make for a poor ride.

I know that my Disc Trucker clearly appears to have room for 700c wheels, even though it has 26″ wheels. But my guess is the ride wouldn’t be the best.

[Steve]

Indeed they were jinxed.

You think Movistar doesn’t wish Quintana was in the race now?

[Steve]

@PotomacCyclist 89877 wrote:

This is why I mentioned early in the thread that Froome was merely trying to defend his title. I didn’t say that “anything could happen” for fear of jinxing Froome (if you believe in sports superstitions).

I wasn’t as nice as you….

@Steve 89437 wrote:

FTFY, unless he crashes out or something.

[Steve]

Just an added point, keeping lots of stuff at work only works if you shower/change at the office. I know when I worked at the Navy Yard, the gym/showers and my building were not close enough for it to make much sense to park the bike, go to the office, get my stuff, go to the gym, and back. Rather, I just carried a lot more stuff with me, went straight to the gym, and then to work.

Now I have a shower on my floor. It makes things so much easier, and is a big part of the reason that I ride basically daily now, instead of weekly.

[Steve]

I think the general opinion on your way home is to take Quincy to the Custis, no doubt. The few extra hills aren’t a big deal when you are going down Rosslyn hill, and Clarendon Circle area going eastbound is much more of a pain than west. So we have agreement!

Coming west into Ballston, I think the answers here pretty much sum it up, it’s just personal preference. Veitch to Key to Fairfax (whether by Wilson or 13th or whatever) is flatter and the Custis to Quincy is trail-ier. I think based upon the fact that you ride in the city with the kids a lot, that you’d feel more than comfortable with the Veitch way, and it’d be an easier ride, but it’s really just personal preference.

[Steve]

@jrenaut 89626 wrote:

I don’t like poison.

Google’s altitude charts made it look like the hills were pretty comparable, but it sounds like that’s not the case?

Custis remains pretty hilly from Veitch to Quincy. Here’s my two cents, since I live at the very intersection that are you going to…..

1. I get off at Veitch but take Key -> Highland -> Wilson -> Fairfax -> Quincy or Randolph. Key is better than that stretch of Wilson if you have the kids (it is residential), and Fairfax has bike lanes unlike Wilson from the intersection of Washington heading West.

2. If you feel like hills, or are looking for more trail/less road, then taking Custis to Stafford is actually the safest way. You then take Stafford down to 9th, to Randolph, and to Wilson. Heading to Ballston I prefer this to getting off at Quincy, because there isn’t really a good way to get to the Southbound side of Quincy from the trail.

[Steve]

@creadinger 89440 wrote:

Any other contenders worth watching? I don’t know why, but I hate Froome. Disappointing Quintana won’t be riding. I was rooting for him last year.

Also, I’m not even sure I can watch since we ditched cable. I don’t know if I want to pay for the streaming feed.

Contador will be billed as the biggest threat, but it’s hard for me to see that happening (though others on the forum know MUCH more than me).

[Steve]

I haven’t been on my bike in a month now, due to the birth of our first child (family biking thread, here I come!). I was off work for 3 weeks, which is normally the only place I ride, or at least the main one, and this week I drove due to being tired and working some odd hours.

I really cannot wait for Monday to be back on the bike and enjoying a ride, you know other than the work part. Hope to see some folks out and about.

[Steve]

@PotomacCyclist 89430 wrote:

Chris Froome will defend his title.

FTFY, unless he crashes out or something.

[Steve]

Just for any curious sorts, Bill is the person who teaches both the Basic Maintenance Class, as well as a Wheel Building Class (which I believe is now one-on-one) at Spokes.

[Steve]

Just out of curiosity, how quickly do the Garmin’s for cycling connect to satellites? I used to run/ride with the watch (Forerunner 405), but just got sick of how long it took to initialize. I live in Ballston, and so I think the tall buildings around having something to do with the issues, but it just made using the watch useless for me.

[Steve]

Gotta admit, cyclists making fun of golf as an expensive hobby is, well……

I hope to god they don’t do this, and don’t think they will. I mean the premise that NPS land could generate more money than it does….no kidding! But that’s what MAKES it park land. I get the fact that there’s a course there already and it could be managed better might be a fair argument, but everything doesn’t have to be high end.

[Steve]

@NicDiesel 87074 wrote:

Is there anything that you all could think of that the Pro Tool Kit doesn’t have that you’d need to do most repairs and builds?

You mean besides a beer fridge?

The one thing I wish I had when doing minor repairs or especially cleaning my bike is an adjustable height stool. Certainly not a must have, but I wish I had room for one.

[Steve]

@jonathankrall 86982 wrote:

All this is despite the fact that the over-50 crowd is very weak in its support for bicycling. For example, a June 2013 WaPo telephone poll in the DC area showed that every demographic that they allowed the data to be broken into (they had a fun on-line tool for this) showed well over 50 percent support for bike lanes except for the oldest residents. When broken down by age, the oldest bracket showed only 50 percent support for bike lanes.

My point is that, if the AARP reflected the views of its members instead of bringing their own expertise to the table, I’d drop them faster than I dropped the AAA.

Maybe you’re right. I’m not sure it’s apples to apples though. AARP is supporting these things because ultimately they think it is good for its members. Our auto-focused systems harm young people and old people the most, right? Young people can’t drive, and sometimes old people can’t either, and therefore incomplete streets affects their mobility. As a result, AARP supports complete streets and bike lanes because they are interested in helping retired people. Perhaps they are educating them as to things that might benefit them that they don’t realize, with you I agree on that.

So….the association for Retired People takes stances on issues that they think benefit Retired People (even if those members don’t think it benefits them). And the association for Automobiles takes stances on issues that they think benefit Automobiles.

To me, AAA throwing much support toward cycling is similar to AARP supporting the reduction of the drinking age. It’s not an issue that really benefits its members.

Now, I know dasgeh is going to remind me that cycling is good for drivers because it reduces congestion, and so AAA should support it even though its members may not. I know. But in MOST locations in the country, congestion really isn’t all that big an issue, and riding places probably really isn’t quicker. Even for most of us on the forum, if you don’t live in Arlington or DC proper, and very close to work, my guess is that the car commute is faster. As a result, I don’t think AAA or many drivers REALLY believe that cycling infrastructure does much for congestion. Buses or Trains would have a much greater impact, IMO. And so AAA doesn’t take stances that benefit cycling.

I don’t like AAA. I don’t like NRA. I don’t think it’s unreasonable for them to have the stances they have though, given the nature of their organization.

[Author]

Posts