In article <[email hidden]>,
Michael Warner said:Tom Keats said:Nothing.
I'm most content with what I have (and it doesn't
include a cycloputer.)
Don'cha just luv the simplicity of cycling?
Some of us also seem to love the scope for inverted snobbery,
too. Why not tell us that you ride centuries in street clothes
from Kmart :-)
Because I usually don't, because
a) there aren't any K-marts around here (Vancouver, Kanada)
b) I don't track my milage, although I've lately done some
out-&-backs to Maple Ridge and back; maybe that's close
to a century, or maybe it isn't. I don't know and I
don't particularly care. Screw a bunch o' numbers!
Actually when I head out that direction, I usually end
up at the pub formerly known as The Wild Duck Inn, at Pitt
Meadows, before turning back. I harbour a fascination with
that location 'cuz that's where at a young age I had my
teeth bashed in and jaw broken in a car collision, but that's
another story.
c) I've accumulated a bunch of cheap but functional cycling
garb purchased mostly from Mountain Equipment Co-Op -- some
old-school jerseys (with just the neck zipper,) various
house-brand plus Louis Garneau[TM] shorts, Andiamo[TM]
riding gonchies, etc. I still like riding in tee-shirts,
of which I have a plethora.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:I find it a wonderment, that so much satisfaction
can be had for so little outlay.
Riding is an investment.
How can it be both an investment and involve little outlay?
Therein lies the wonderment.
Quoted message said:In fact,
it's /not/ an investment, because if you stop doing it for a while,
you'll lose your fitness and get fat. The benefit is strictly temporary.
Stop riding!!? Bite yer tongue :-)
Besides, once a certain fitness level is attained, it
actually seems to take a longish while for it to
wear off.
Further besides, I don't ride for fitness, and
never have. I don't even ride strictly for
transportation. Mostly I ride because it's an
exhuberant self-expression that doesn't incur
too many dire repercussions. I ride to ride,
and my bikes are my simplist's "land canoes".
Further further besides, so much bought stuff
(tools, clothing, accessories & parts) are
transferable from bike to bike, and much of
that stuff only needs to be purchased once,
and then you have it at-hand forever.
Further further further besides, my current
stable consists of four or five & a half bikes,
none of which I paid money for. The Raleigh
Twenty was bequeathed to me, my main ride was
abandoned after the resolution of a local
bus drivers' strike/lockout, and the rest are
salvaged but usable discards that just needed
a little work.
I assure you, I'm not into inverted/reverse
snobbery. In the past I've enjoyed the thrill
of purchasing > $1000 brand-new bikes. I've
been entangled in the sticky web of clipless
pedal + shoe decisions. I used to have a
cycloputer, until I outgrew it.
Over the past decade it's been driven home like
a hammer'd nail into my brain, the difference
between what we /need/, and what we want.
I don't always get what I want, but I always
seem to end up with having a bike to ride.
I guess I'm predilected (and grateful for it.)
cheers,
Tom
--
-- ... and all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by ...
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca