Mutant Road Bikes

I've observed a weird new species of road bike around on my daily commute
and weekend rides. These bikes must be new as they have all the latest
gimmicks and are ridden by guys in their 20's. Symptoms:

- Compact geometry with a steeply sloping toptube leaving a whole bunch of
seatpost exposed.
- Fattish tires with treads
- Oversized alu frame with a garish paint job
- Triple crankset with ridiculously low gearing
- Drop bars with a treadless stem mounted upside down to give lots of rise.
- Disk brakes?!?
- Low spoke count wheels.

Whats up with this? I invariably come up on these guys fast and see them
struggling with a seat postion 6" too low (must be converted mountain
bikers). Their high stems put their bars above the level of the seat making
the bike look like a hybrid. Despite the low seat position, their seatposts
are bending 1" back and forth as they thrash along at a 40rpm cadence (yep:
mountain bikers). I draft them for about 5 seconds until I get bored of
watching their boat-anchor brake calipers dragging on the disks. Then I
drop them.

Is this the future? Have I died and gone to hell?

"Dave Mayer" wrote in message
news:huK2c.736564$ts4.681675@pd7tw3no...
I've observed a weird new species of road bike around on my daily commute
and weekend rides. These bikes must be new as they have all the latest
gimmicks and are ridden by guys in their 20's. Symptoms:

- Compact geometry with a steeply sloping toptube leaving a whole bunch of
seatpost exposed.
- Fattish tires with treads
- Oversized alu frame with a garish paint job
- Triple crankset with ridiculously low gearing
- Drop bars with a treadless stem mounted upside down to give lots of
rise.
- Disk brakes?!?
- Low spoke count wheels.

Whats up with this? I invariably come up on these guys fast and see them
struggling with a seat postion 6" too low (must be converted mountain
bikers). Their high stems put their bars above the level of the seat
making
the bike look like a hybrid. Despite the low seat position, their
seatposts
are bending 1" back and forth as they thrash along at a 40rpm cadence
(yep:
mountain bikers). I draft them for about 5 seconds until I get bored of
watching their boat-anchor brake calipers dragging on the disks. Then I
drop them.

Is this the future? Have I died and gone to hell?

The bike you described is either a touring or cyclocross bike with all of
the ultra-trendy features. Yes, the "compact" geometry is definitely
inspired by mountain bikes. As for the cadence: I see just as many roadies
running a low cadence as mountain bikers. The seat position is just
stupidity - not a flaw in the bike's design. I ride mountain bikes (and a
commuter bike) with very long exposed seatposts and have experienced none of
the flex that you're describing. Being a "40 something", with neck
problems, I do prefer a higher stem. As the population ages, this will
become the standard, along with wide, cushy saddles on road bikes. What's
weird is that young guys are buying these bikes. Very interesting.

I'm surprised that you've seen a lot of these bikes around: I only know of
a few models on the market (Giant, Cannondale and Kona particularly). The
other trend that you didn't mention is toward what are called "fitness"
bikes - basically, road bikes with flat handlebars. This is only a slight
variant on the hybrid bikes, which are almost identical in form and
function. The difference is probably a lack of shock fork and a longer top
tube for the "fitness" bikes. Fitness bikes are starting to feature disc
brakes.

It is rather ridiculous to add 3 lbs to your bike's weight to get discs,
unless you're doing fully-loaded Alpine touring. Also, I don't think I want
that kind of stopping power when riding drop handlebars, especially in a
pace line. It's hard enough to modulate side pulls "just so" when riding in
a group at high speeds, wheel to wheel. With discs, one false flick of the
brake finger and it's an instant bloody pile-up.

Rocketman

In article TVM2c.197301$jk2.708008@attbi_s53,
"Rocketman" wrote:

"Dave Mayer" wrote in message
news:huK2c.736564$ts4.681675@pd7tw3no...
I've observed a weird new species of road bike around on my daily commute
and weekend rides. These bikes must be new as they have all the latest
gimmicks and are ridden by guys in their 20's. Symptoms:

- Compact geometry with a steeply sloping toptube leaving a whole bunch of
seatpost exposed.
- Fattish tires with treads
- Oversized alu frame with a garish paint job
- Triple crankset with ridiculously low gearing
- Drop bars with a treadless stem mounted upside down to give lots of
rise.
- Disk brakes?!?
- Low spoke count wheels.

Whats up with this? I invariably come up on these guys fast and see them
struggling with a seat postion 6" too low (must be converted mountain
bikers). Their high stems put their bars above the level of the seat
making
the bike look like a hybrid. Despite the low seat position, their
seatposts
are bending 1" back and forth as they thrash along at a 40rpm cadence
(yep:
mountain bikers). I draft them for about 5 seconds until I get bored of
watching their boat-anchor brake calipers dragging on the disks. Then I
drop them.

Is this the future? Have I died and gone to hell?

The bike you described is either a touring or cyclocross bike with all of
the ultra-trendy features. Yes, the "compact" geometry is definitely
inspired by mountain bikes. As for the cadence: I see just as many roadies
running a low cadence as mountain bikers. The seat position is just
stupidity - not a flaw in the bike's design. I ride mountain bikes (and a
commuter bike) with very long exposed seatposts and have experienced none of
the flex that you're describing. Being a "40 something", with neck
problems, I do prefer a higher stem. As the population ages, this will
become the standard, along with wide, cushy saddles on road bikes. What's
weird is that young guys are buying these bikes. Very interesting.

I think these are mostly repurposed 'cross bikes, though

I'm surprised that you've seen a lot of these bikes around: I only know of
a few models on the market (Giant, Cannondale and Kona particularly). The
other trend that you didn't mention is toward what are called "fitness"
bikes - basically, road bikes with flat handlebars. This is only a slight
variant on the hybrid bikes, which are almost identical in form and
function. The difference is probably a lack of shock fork and a longer top
tube for the "fitness" bikes. Fitness bikes are starting to feature disc
brakes.

For various reasons, all three of those brands are reasonably common in
the part of the world Dave lives in. Kona has its head office just over
the US border outside of Greater Vancouver, and the Dr. Dew is one of
the better-known fitness bikes, avec discs.

It is rather ridiculous to add 3 lbs to your bike's weight to get discs,
unless you're doing fully-loaded Alpine touring. Also, I don't think I want
that kind of stopping power when riding drop handlebars, especially in a
pace line. It's hard enough to modulate side pulls "just so" when riding in
a group at high speeds, wheel to wheel. With discs, one false flick of the
brake finger and it's an instant bloody pile-up.

It makes more sense in Vancouver, where rain is a significant issue, and
rain is a situation (while the fans of rim brakes don't like to admit
it) where discs provide more consistent performance than rim brakes.

3 pounds is a ridiculous guess, unless you're planning to transplant
something from a KX250. Avid lists its Juicy 7 disc system at 385g
(picked at random as the first disc weight I could find), or well under
a pound. Given that Avid single-digit 7 V-brakes weigh in at 180g (I'm
discounting the Ti version's 15g advantage for being stupid), that
suggests a total disc weight penalty of about 200g, or less than a
half-pound. This costs nobody nothing, unless you're a Cat 1
hillclimber, and you're in a close one.

As for the sensitivity of discs, you're suggesting an issue which is
down to either a rider with insufficient skill, or a brake system set up
badly. Now that I think about it, I'd be pretty choked if my sidepulls
_didn't_ offer enough performance to cause a peloton pile-up with a
flick of a finger. They do, and I resolve the issue by using my brakes
properly.

Nothing special, just RSX dual pivots on the front of both road bikes,
--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine/wiredcola/
President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

Dave Mayer wrote:
I've observed a weird new species of road bike around on my daily commute
and weekend rides. These bikes must be new as they have all the latest
gimmicks and are ridden by guys in their 20's. Symptoms:

- Compact geometry with a steeply sloping toptube leaving a whole bunch of
seatpost exposed.
- Fattish tires with treads
- Oversized alu frame with a garish paint job
- Triple crankset with ridiculously low gearing
- Drop bars with a treadless stem mounted upside down to give lots of rise.
- Disk brakes?!?
- Low spoke count wheels.

Whats up with this? I invariably come up on these guys fast and see them
struggling with a seat postion 6" too low (must be converted mountain
bikers). Their high stems put their bars above the level of the seat making
the bike look like a hybrid. Despite the low seat position, their seatposts
are bending 1" back and forth as they thrash along at a 40rpm cadence (yep:
mountain bikers). I draft them for about 5 seconds until I get bored of
watching their boat-anchor brake calipers dragging on the disks. Then I
drop them.

Is this the future?

Yes. They have been assimilated by the mass marketing Gods of cycling.
Don't look now but you're next.

Have I died and gone to hell?



Purgatory, maybe.

Greg

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 21:58:11 +0000, Rocketman wrote:


It is rather ridiculous to add 3 lbs to your bike's weight to get discs,
unless you're doing fully-loaded Alpine touring.

I don't see it even then. Rim brakes _are_ disk brakes, with a
622mm-diameter disk. To think that a mountain-bike disk brake will be
more efficient is plain silly. They have their uses, but that revolves
around mud.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | You will say Christ saith this and the apostles say this; but
_`\(,_ | what canst thou say? -- George Fox.
(_)/ (_) |

David L. Johnson wrote:
On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 21:58:11 +0000, Rocketman wrote:


It is rather ridiculous to add 3 lbs to your bike's weight to get discs,
unless you're doing fully-loaded Alpine touring.


I don't see it even then. Rim brakes _are_ disk brakes, with a
622mm-diameter disk. To think that a mountain-bike disk brake will be
more efficient is plain silly. They have their uses, but that revolves
around mud.


Hand fatigue on long descents? A well setup hydraulic brake saves my hands
considerably.

I don't ride wet weather but I hear that non-rim disk brakes shed water
much quicker than rim brakes shortening stopping distances.

Greg

G.T. wrote: [regarding disk brake "advantages"]:

Hand fatigue on long descents? A well setup hydraulic brake saves my
hands considerably.

I can't imagine this comes up very often for most people. I've ridden
mountains with full touring loads and had no such problems. And my arms
look nothing like Popeye's.

I don't ride wet weather but I hear that non-rim disk brakes shed water
much quicker than rim brakes shortening stopping distances.

Probably true, but OTOH - a little reduction in wet braking is perhaps
fine. It tends to match the reduction in tire traction, and helps to
keep the "rubber side" down.

--
Frank Krygowski [To reply, omit what's between "at" and "cc"]

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 16:28:48 -0800, Ryan Cousineau
wrote:



For various reasons, all three of those brands are reasonably common in
the part of the world Dave lives in. Kona has its head office just over
the US border outside of Greater Vancouver, and the Dr. Dew is one of
the better-known fitness bikes, avec discs.

"avec disques," ne c'est pas?

(man, my French is really in awful shape!)

It makes more sense in Vancouver, where rain is a significant issue, and
rain is a situation (while the fans of rim brakes don't like to admit
it) where discs provide more consistent performance than rim brakes.

I rode single-pivot sidepulls with ancient pads in the rain in London.
You learn to factor in the greater stopping distance, for sure...!

3 pounds is a ridiculous guess, unless you're planning to transplant
something from a KX250. Avid lists its Juicy 7 disc system at 385g
(picked at random as the first disc weight I could find), or well under
a pound. Given that Avid single-digit 7 V-brakes weigh in at 180g (I'm
discounting the Ti version's 15g advantage for being stupid), that
suggests a total disc weight penalty of about 200g, or less than a
half-pound. This costs nobody nothing, unless you're a Cat 1
hillclimber, and you're in a close one.

Not to mention the weight you're no longer carrying in your pocket! I
can't afford discs under any circumstance these days....



As for the sensitivity of discs, you're suggesting an issue which is
down to either a rider with insufficient skill, or a brake system set up
badly. Now that I think about it, I'd be pretty choked if my sidepulls
_didn't_ offer enough performance to cause a peloton pile-up with a
flick of a finger. They do, and I resolve the issue by using my brakes
properly.

Nothing special, just RSX dual pivots on the front of both road bikes,

And on the rear?

-Luigi

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 19:12:13 GMT, "Dave Mayer"
wrote:

I've observed a weird new species of road bike around on my daily commute
and weekend rides. These bikes must be new as they have all the latest
gimmicks and are ridden by guys in their 20's. Symptoms:

- Compact geometry with a steeply sloping toptube leaving a whole bunch of
seatpost exposed.

MTB-inspired, and pretty common in the peloton these days, if you pay
attention.

- Fattish tires with treads

Beats pinch-flatting on the way to work

- Oversized alu frame with a garish paint job

Oversized Al makes up for the fact that you can't get the same
stiffness out of an Al tube of the same gauge as a CrMo steel one,
assuming equal wall thicknesses. (erm, right?)

No excuse for the paint.

- Triple crankset with ridiculously low gearing

Not everyone is Tyler.

- Drop bars with a treadless stem mounted upside down to give lots of rise.

A consequence of the threadless stem. Many steerers cut too short to
raise bars comfortably for guys who don't intend to impersonate
Europros. Ergo, weird looking rising stems.

The benefits of threadless are as yet unknown to me, and probably to
be learnt at another time...as it stands, I'm happy with my threaded
stem, and will probably use its position and dimensions as a means to
selecting stem and handlebar position on a new bike--whenever that
might be, and whether or not its headset is threaded.

- Disk brakes?!?

Maybe you were looking at newfangled cyclocross racing bikes, where
the discs offer advantages in muddy, ucky conditions.

- Low spoke count wheels.

I'm not sold on these, either. But I'm a big fat *******. Weigh me
up on the bike and I'm my own two-man breakaway.


Whats up with this? I invariably come up on these guys fast and see them
struggling with a seat postion 6" too low (must be converted mountain
bikers).

Low saddles are a function of bad positioning, and perhaps a lack of
confidence in bicycling skill. Beginners always set their saddles
lower than optimum. raising the saddle requires confidence in your
own ability to control the bicycle, and faith that such a change won't
unduly compromise that same control.

Their high stems put their bars above the level of the seat making
the bike look like a hybrid. Despite the low seat position, their seatposts
are bending 1" back and forth as they thrash along at a 40rpm cadence (yep:
mountain bikers). I draft them for about 5 seconds until I get bored of
watching their boat-anchor brake calipers dragging on the disks. Then I
drop them.

You're exaggerating seatpost flex, or those guys are using bendy
straws as seatposts.

If you take pleasure dropping obvious novices, I have a few helpless
baby seals that you might lwant to club to death.

-Luigi

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 21:58:11 GMT, "Rocketman"
wrote:

The bike you described is either a touring or cyclocross bike with all of
the ultra-trendy features. Yes, the "compact" geometry is definitely
inspired by mountain bikes. As for the cadence: I see just as many roadies
running a low cadence as mountain bikers. The seat position is just
stupidity - not a flaw in the bike's design. I ride mountain bikes (and a
commuter bike) with very long exposed seatposts and have experienced none of
the flex that you're describing. Being a "40 something", with neck
problems, I do prefer a higher stem. As the population ages, this will
become the standard, along with wide, cushy saddles on road bikes. What's
weird is that young guys are buying these bikes. Very interesting.


The older guys have money, and buy bikes, which creates demand. The
bikes that old guys buy is what's generally available. So young guys
buy them.

At least, the ones who aren't so young and so under-resourced that
they do their first few miles on beaters plucked from used shops or
pawnshops or other such venues.

-Luigi