[vvill]

For touring, etc. I would go with Shimano just for more universal serviceability, and durability. SRAM is probably fine too but I think there’s a few more plastic pieces? I’m actually not really sure, as I don’t have much experience with their stuff.

I’ve ridden Sora, Tiagra, 105 and Ultegra – any of those are fine in my book. My 9-speed Tiagra right shifter is probably one of the smoothest shifters I’ve ever had. The MTB/flat bar stuff is fine too if you aren’t riding dropbars.

Belt drive is nice in theory, but I would want to bring a spare belt (which isn’t that easy to pack). I know some folks have toured very successfully on belt drive but they do bring a spare belt since there’s no way of repairing a broken one.

[vvill]

@Harry Meatmotor 146292 wrote:

If my sarcasm in up-thread posts isn’t clear enough, I’ll state more clearly: I don’t trust luddites that eschew the last 30 years of technological advances and mainstreaming of superior materials science. He may be “fast” on a bike, but he’s a kook. Seriously, 7-4-7 non-OS tubing will dent if a moth farts in its’ general direction… and that rear derailleur?? yeah, obviously Tullio had it ALL wrong…

Yeah those things are definitely beyond casual retrogrouch. I specifically mentioned only the tires. I was “liek, whut?!” when I read about the tubing choice, and it seems pointless to run a rear shifting combo like that for any reason other than to be super-vintage-elite.

[vvill]

@peterw_diy 146280 wrote:

Real-world riding: second place on a 360mi self supported race on unpaved roads, with a 2×5 freewheel setup and, yes, that crankset:

https://www.cxmagazine.com/gravel-grinder-bike-jan-heine-oregon-outback-360-2014

Keep that in mind when you read his “all roads” description.

I have a lot of respect for Jan Heine and enjoy reading his stuff (and Bicycle Quarterly in general). I would love to try some Compass tires – only partly for the ride quality (I almost always take a photo of them when I see them on a fellow rider’s bike).

Just think the marketing is laying it on a bit thick, although that can be true for the whole cycling industry.

[vvill]

@ian74 146261 wrote:

Yeah, but you DID see the description right?

“The best bottle cage in the world: It grips securely and rattle-free on all roads, yet your bottle is easy to retrieve and insert. Light weight and beauty are an added bonus. They last forever, too.”

It’s the best bottle cage in the world. IN THE WORLD. Lasting forever is just an added bonus.

HIGH-PERFORMANCE PARTS for REAL-WORLD RIDING

we’re all riding in the fake world. with lo-fi parts.

[vvill]

@Harry Meatmotor 146201 wrote:

Although the idea of a touring bike is fun to fart around with on paper, I just don’t see the point of trying to keep gear inches near 53×11. Go with low gears. Being spun-out cadence-wise at 40+ mph is no big deal on a touring bike. Just coast and enjoy the scenery!!! At those speeds, I’d be more worried about adequate brakes than whether I need to turn 100+ rpms so I can make 42mph rather than 39mph…

And let’s be honest, too – the last time I felt 34T x 30T (which, btw, is the biggest cog you can fit on “normal,” “new,” road derailleurs with some b-tension screw fiddling) was insufficient was at Hilly Billy Roubaix. 50-34 plus 11-32 should be plenty for loaded touring unless you plan on riding 20% grades all day long.

Agreed on not needing a top end like that.

I also ran 34-30 at HBR (and Mountains of Misery actually). In both cases it was sufficient, but not ideal. 32 in the back would’ve been nicer.

[vvill]

Ah, okay. Yeah for touring maybe not the best but I also would choose differently for touring. And if I were going with a wide range cassette I’d also go 1x – to me that’s half the point of having one. Otherwise a FD with 16-18T or so difference in the chainrings and a more normal cassette would be fine.

I haven’t really had the urge to try 1x / wide cassette yet, although I do have older 1×9 and 1×10 set-ups, they both use more regular cassette spacings. I made my own chain retention device out of some hardware store parts.

[vvill]

My guess would be the front derailleur. Maybe try propping the bike against the wall, and back pedal slowly using your hands to see where it’s dropping off exactly – might give you a clue.

[vvill]

@Raymo853 146071 wrote:

For touring, I suggest getting a 5 bolt crankset with the outer bolt diameter being 110 and the inner 74. You can find chain rings for those everywhere and in many many sizes. I have seen as small as 24 and as large as 54. Then ruin a wide by not crazy wide rear cassette. One with the smallest being 11 or 12 and the largest 30 or 32. Having the largest as 34-42 may sound good, but that can lead to a huge amount of other problems.

What are the other problems? (Genuinely curious – I haven’t run anything larger than a 30t on road / 36t on MTB cassette.)

I do like the 5-bolt 110 BCD standard myself. Seems like plenty of options – 34T to 53T+ (and even one company makes a 33T)

[vvill]

Raleigh Tamland (steel)/Roker (carbon) are gravel bikes are both have 72.5-77.5mm BB drop.

(For reference, my Kona and Raleigh CX bikes are both 65mm. Jamis Renegade is between 70.5 and 73.5, Kona Rove 70-72, Salsa Warbird 70.)

[vvill]

Really sorry to hear that. I had a similar incident going downhill on the Custis into Rosslyn when I was new to road biking. My front tire actually punctured (presumably in the seam), and it was wet out too. Broke my wrist and elbow, but not badly, luckily.

A broken femur is really, really tough luck. Best wishes in your recovery.

[vvill]

It’s mostly style points for money, although being able to run down to a 24T (assuming your front derailleur can handle that) is unusual. Getting different/replacement chain rings on that crankset would probably be expensive too though.

There is certainly a segment of the cycling community that loves the classic look/function of things like full metal fenders, handlebar mounted canvas bags, tan sidewalls, sprung leather saddles and matching bar tape, shiny chrome/silver parts, etc. as opposed to light aggressive racing carbon frames, deep dish wheels, etc.

The most recent equivalent to running a tiny front chainring would probably be to run a wide range cassette in the back. Cassettes with 10-42 or 11-46 are becoming more common, but even 12-30 gives a lot more range than 11-23 or 11-25. And not too many years ago lower geared compact cranks (50-34) began replacing more standard (53-39) cranks on many setups.

[vvill]

@hozn 145875 wrote:

Sounds miserable. . I love riding hard and generally understand that variation is the key, but have never had the discipline to follow a training plan.

Same.

The gist of it all is: ride harder than you currently do. Doing that 2-3x per week is fine. Give your body time to recover and adapt to those rides (you can ride every day if you want, just don’t try to ride hard every ride). Repeat.

Training for long rides is a little tougher as you need to do longish rides and at least 20 mins of constant exertion to properly trigger adaptations for endurance. I’m terrible at doing those sorts of rides.

Most people (or at least, in my impression) don’t ride hard enough on those hard rides, and don’t take it easy enough on the easy days. That’s why heart rate monitors and power meters are helpful, as you can quantify your efforts and your progress. But – it’s actually pretty hard to safely get a proper workout on metropolitan roads/trails/etc. once you reach even a basic amateur level of ‘strength’ because of traffic lights, other riders, stop signs, etc. The C&O and Hains Point work okay though if it’s not peak hours.

[vvill]

@lordofthemark 145657 wrote:

I have put my tires (the 700×38 Ryders I used to replace the OEM tires) on Strava as equipment, to help manage replacing them, see how many miles I get on them etc. Thanks to MelloYello I will soon be test riding a pair of LITs. Assuming we close the deal, I will likely still be putting the Ryders back on for winter. Searching has revealed no way to revive a retired piece of equipment on Strava. All I can think of is to add a duplicate, and then sum the miles myself. Any other ideas?

You can revive retired equipment: add “/edit” to the end of the component URL. e.g.:

http://www.strava.com/components/1234567/edit

Then blank out the “retired” date and hit Save.

I don’t think it will really give you the correct mileage though, you can only have a start and finish date – not sets of dates.

Strava has lots of things like this, they seem to jump around a lot with what features they want to promote, and many don’t get finished properly. I used the component lifetimes for a short time, then gave up. Same with most of their premium features actually (never renewed my free trial).

[vvill]

Another “what hozn said”: For *just* the C&O I would probably just try to shove 28/30s in there!

But for n+1, I guess I would consider whether you might like/enjoy gravel/dirt riding more or MTBing more. Obviously you can ride a MTB on gravel, although it’s a little slower. CX/gravel bike on singletrack is a bit tougher, esp if you’re not great with MTB skills (like me).

There are all sorts of things that go into different bike designs but I can’t say whether they make that much difference. (I simply haven’t ridden enough bikes!)

A CX bike will generally be more aggressive than a gravel/adventure bike (lower stack, longer reach, steeper angles), and have a higher bottom bracket. It only really needs to clear 35mm tires, and is designed for quick handling, stiffness and light weight over comfort, and doesn’t always have rack, fender or even bottle cage mounts. The top tube is sometimes shaped specifically for shouldering and sometimes cables are run over the toptube so they’re not as exposed to dirt/mud from under the bike. It’s probably more similar to a crit road bike really. The trend lately is to have 1x gearing since the gearing range needed in a CX race isn’t that large, but even before that, 46/36 was a common chainring set up. Bikes are weight weenied and tubulars are the norm for competitive racers. Expensive CX tires are a little odd in that they’re so very specific in purpose: CX often has slippery but not sharp surfaces (grass, mud, dirt, sand – sure, but less rocks, roots, gravel) so they’re not particularly puncture resistant, they have smaller knobs and since they’re also made to be light and supple the knobs you need for races don’t usually last long on pavement (nor sharp gravel rides).

A gravel/adventure bike is more similar to an “endurance” road bike but usually with 40mm+ tire clearances. So – more stack, less reach (significantly taller headtubes), longer chainstays and lower BBs. More stable handling, ability to ride longer more comfortably (possibly in aero positions, and in pacelines). Gearing will usually be wider, although with 10-42 cassettes and such nowadays, 1x is popular. Frame shapes can be a bit more varied since there’s no shouldering of the bike – OTOH, fitting frame bags/packs and multiple water bottles is important. Tires need to be tougher through the casing and running them tubeless is popular.

A touring bike will almost always have full fender and rack mounts and the frame/tube shape/sizes will probably be chosen to be a little stiffer/tougher, to handle heavier loads. So it’ll be a heavier frame. It’ll likely have the widest gearing – a triple or double, and touring bikes also tend to use older, burlier components for durability + serviceability: bar end shifters, mechanical discs over hydraulic discs, etc. And steel is the most popular frame material for the same reasons.

Compared to an all-out road racing bike, I think the CX bike was seen by bike manufacturers as the best “speedy” commuter alternative so they were often marketed as dual duty, especially for commuters who liked to dabble in CX and wanted a bike a little less single-purpose than a pure CX race bike. But since “endurance road” and now gravel bikes are their own categories I think there’s a little more consistency in what you might expect out of a bike category… a little more.

[vvill]

If you ever think you need inspiration for learning bike skillz, just look at what else the UCI supports

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTymedv_4RE

[Author]

Replies