Hydration and Camelbak

[Whinds]

I'm seeing more and more Camelbaks on the trails and am
wondering what the consensus is here.

My training trail has a lot of water stops available so it
is not a major problem. I usually ride 80 miles daily with a
century + on the weekend. I use two water cages and a *****
pack that has dual bottle carriers. I start the day with
water in the cages and a 20oz bottle of diet Mountain Dew in
the ***** pack. The MD is for the caffiine, I don't drank
coffee. The remaining bottle carrier is for a bananna and
heavy duty surgical gloves for roadside repairs. The *****
pack itself holds protein bars, clear glasses, serving size
powdered Gatorade in baggies and a well stocked first aid
kit. (I'm prone to road rash) My rain jacket rides under my
seat with spare tubes and my tool kit. I've sorta become
accustomed to this setup but am thinking maybe someone in
the NG has a better idea.

I'm thinking of moving into double centuries this year and
am wondering if a Camelbak would improve my ride. I've
looked at 3 versions. The Rocket looks sleek and has
improved air flow but holds the least amount of liquid. The
Lobo is quite nice, slim, more water capacity, but lite on
serious storage. The Mule holds 100oz and appears to be the
logical choice with a net to hold leg warmers and a long
sleeve shirt but is it too big and bulky? I don't know if I
want something this large hanging on my shoulders for a
long ride.

 

[Gooserider]

While I can't say I ride anywhere near a double century,
I do use a Rocket on a regular basis. I live in Florida
and two large bottles just don't cut it in our tropical
humidity. I keep my minitool, keys, spare tube, gloves,
wallet, and other assorted stuff in it and it's quite
bearable. It's not very heavy, and the Coolmax back
keeps cool. It's kinda Fredly to wear one on the road,
but I like it.

 

[Kevan Smith]

On 10 Mar 2004 01:39:50 GMT, [email protected] (whinds) from AOL
http://www.aol.com wrote:

>I'm thinking of moving into double centuries this year and
>am wondering if a Camelbak would improve my ride. I've
>looked at 3 versions. The Rocket looks sleek and has
>improved air flow but holds the least amount of liquid. The
>Lobo is quite nice, slim, more water capacity, but lite on
>serious storage. The Mule holds 100oz and appears to be the
>logical choice with a net to hold leg warmers and a long
>sleeve shirt but is it too big and bulky? I don't know if I
>want something this large hanging on my shoulders for a
>long ride.

Trust me, you don't. The weight gets to be a real drag after
about 80 miles for
me. I'd hate lugging one for 200. At that distance, I think
you're better off looking for some sort of on-bike
storage, like a rack with a trunk.

--
[email protected]
What is the reality of the situation?
3

 

[Rick Onanian]

On 10 Mar 2004 01:39:50 GMT, [email protected] (whinds) wrote:
>I'm seeing more and more Camelbaks on the trails and am
>wondering what the consensus is here.

Why is the word "trail" commonly used to refer to pavement?
I've always figured it meant dirt, and one would say "route"
or "path" (depending on context) for pavement.

Of course, if you're talking about doing double centuries on
hilly singletrack, well, you can use any word you want to
describe anything you want; that's quite a feat, deserving
much respect.

>My training trail has a lot of water stops available so it
>is not a major problem. I usually ride 80 miles daily with
>a century + on the weekend. I use two water cages and a
>***** pack that has dual bottle carriers. I start the day
>with water in the cages and a 20oz bottle of diet Mountain
>Dew in the ***** pack. The MD is for the caffiine, I don't
>drank coffee. The remaining bottle

Caffeine can be had in a more compact, lightweight,
convenient pill form; you can break the pill into smaller
servings. It's probably a bit cheaper than 20oz bottled soft
drinks, too.

>carrier is for a bananna and heavy duty surgical gloves for
>roadside repairs. The ***** pack itself holds protein bars,
>clear glasses, serving size powdered Gatorade in baggies
>and a well stocked first aid kit. (I'm prone to road rash)
>My rain jacket rides under my seat with spare tubes and my
>tool kit. I've sorta become accustomed to this setup but am
>thinking maybe someone in the NG has a better idea.

Better than something that you're so satisfied with?

It ain't broke. Don't fix it.

>I'm thinking of moving into double centuries this year and
>am wondering if a Camelbak would improve my ride. I've
>looked at 3 versions. The Rocket looks sleek and has
>improved air flow but holds the least amount of liquid. The
>Lobo is quite nice, slim, more water capacity, but lite on
>serious storage. The Mule holds 100oz and appears to be the
>logical choice with a net to hold leg warmers and a long
>sleeve shirt but is it too big and bulky? I don't know if I
>want something this large hanging on my shoulders for a
>long ride.

I ride with backpacks like these. I have a small,
streamlined one that I don't bother with anymore. I have a
Camelbak Mule, equipped for mountain biking. I have an
"Ultimate XSpurt", with nearly or the same cargo capacity as
the Mule, equipped for road riding.

Of course, the reservoirs are interchangeable.

The air flow things on the back of my Mule are ineffective,
but may work better if I didn't have it so stuffed. The
flat, soft back on the road pack is fine.

My back gets rather hot and sweaty. Carrying all the **** on
my back ends up putting more weight on my arms and hands.
For road riding, I've been trying to offload some of the
stuff to the bike, but am hampered by having one set of
equipment for riding many different bikes.

I'd say that if you're happy with what you've got,
don't mess with
it. If you want to carry additional liquid and/or solid
cargo, and you don't wish to add it to the bike, a
backpack is a good option, but I wouldn't just pull
everything off the bike and throw it on my back.

It's more useful to have on your back when off road, where
you need the more nimble, lighter bike to more easily throw
around underneath you...and the pack + stuff works as back
armor when you biff.
--
Rick Onanian

 

[Claire Petersky]

"whinds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> I'm thinking of moving into double centuries this year and
> am wondering if
a
> Camelbak would improve my ride.

Here's the issues:

One, is, if you have a camelbak, you're more likely to drink
more often. So, in that sense, having a camelbak will
improve your ride, if you don't drink very regularly
otherwise. Somehow it's easy to take little sips all the
time with a camelbak, but it's a hassle to reach for your
water bottle.

Second, if you're doing a very long ride and it's
unsupported, you might want a camelbak so you'll have enough
water between water sources. I remember one long ride I took
in unfamiliar territory, and I very sharply remember there
being an espresso stand (yeah, Seattle area) in the middle
of a small town. The woman at the stand very kindly filled
my camelbak with ice and then cold water, just out of
complete human kindness. This really helped me out, as I
otherwise wouldn't have had easy access to water for the
next thirty miles. It's situations like these where having a
large water bladder, and not just a couple of bottles, is
really helpful.

Third, if you're in very hot weather, a camelbak is
indispensable. I did a short but very hot ride in the desert
outside of Las Vegas one year in July, and my husband and I
filled out camelbaks three times in three hours -- I have a
72 oz and he has a 100 oz. That's a lot of water, but each
time the bladders were completely drained by the time we hit
a water source again.

However, a full camelbak is heavy. Because of the weight of
those things, if you're planning to do these long rides this
summer, the time to start training with a full camelbak is
now. Get used to carrying a weight on your shoulders in
March, and it won't seem so bad in July.

If you regularly hydrate without the camelbak, if you are
planning a supported double century, and if you don't
anticipate the weather being extraordinarily hot, then I
wouldn't bother with the camelbak. That's too much weight to
carry on your back for 200 miles.

Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky Please replace earthlink for mouse-potato
and .net for .com Home of the meditative cyclist:
http://home.earthlink.net/~cpetersky/Welcome.htm Email me
re: the new Tiferet CD (http://www.tiferet.net) See the
books I've set free at:
http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

 

[Peter Cole]

"whinds" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> I'm thinking of moving into double centuries this year and
> am wondering if a Camelbak would improve my ride.

I stopped using a Camelbak for all road rides after using
one out of habit for years. For long road rides, they're
just too uncomfortable. I use insulated water bottles
(Polar, 24 oz.). I have 3 holders on my distance bike, and
often use a rear rack to carry extra gear and bottles if the
weather is very hot and/or the distances between water stops
is large. Getting all that weight off your back makes a big
difference, especially for doubles & beyond. I'll often get
a big bottle of OJ or similar at stops, drink some, then
pour the rest into an empty bottle to drink over the next
hour or so.

 

[John Everett]

On 10 Mar 2004 01:39:50 GMT, [email protected] (whinds) wrote:

>I'm thinking of moving into double centuries this year and
>am wondering if a Camelbak would improve my ride. I've
>looked at 3 versions. The Rocket looks sleek and has
>improved air flow but holds the least amount of liquid. The
>Lobo is quite nice, slim, more water capacity, but lite on
>serious storage. The Mule holds 100oz and appears to be the
>logical choice with a net to hold leg warmers and a long
>sleeve shirt but is it too big and bulky? I don't know if I
>want something this large hanging on my shoulders for a
>long ride.

I rode with water bottles for years and years until I got a
Mule a year and a half ago. What really surprised me was how
quickly I got used to wearing it. If you try a Camelbak
you'll probably find you soon don't even notice you're
wearing it.

I still ride primarily with water bottles but find the
Camelbak particularly useful for riding in the Rockies,
where I want supplemental clothing readily available. The
mule is also handy for day-hikes.

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net
http://home.earthlink.net/~jeverett3

 

[Matt O'Toole]

whinds wrote:

> I'm seeing more and more Camelbaks on the trails and am
> wondering what the consensus is here.
>
> My training trail has a lot of water stops available so it
> is not a major problem. I usually ride 80 miles daily with
> a century + on the weekend. I use two water cages and a
> ***** pack that has dual bottle carriers. I start the day
> with water in the cages and a 20oz bottle of diet Mountain
> Dew in the ***** pack. The MD is for the caffiine, I don't
> drank coffee. The remaining bottle carrier is for a
> bananna and heavy duty surgical gloves for roadside
> repairs. The ***** pack itself holds protein bars, clear
> glasses, serving size powdered Gatorade in baggies and a
> well stocked first aid kit. (I'm prone to road rash) My
> rain jacket rides under my seat with spare tubes and my
> tool kit. I've sorta become accustomed to this setup but
> am thinking maybe someone in the NG has a better idea.

You ought to be able to fit all this stuff in a medium sized
saddlebag plus jersey pockets. That's what I do, for about
the same amount of stuff. Why the ***** pack?

> I'm thinking of moving into double centuries this year and
> am wondering if a Camelbak would improve my ride. I've
> looked at 3 versions. The Rocket looks sleek and has
> improved air flow but holds the least amount of liquid.
> The Lobo is quite nice, slim, more water capacity, but
> lite on serious storage. The Mule holds 100oz and appears
> to be the logical choice with a net to hold leg warmers
> and a long sleeve shirt but is it too big and bulky? I
> don't know if I want something this large hanging on my
> shoulders for a long ride.

You probably don't.

Camelbacks are great for off road riding, where they
get the weight off the bike for better handling on
technical terrain. They also make it easier to drink.
But for road riding, it's definately more comfortable
to carry stuff on the bike. If you really need more
water capacity, try to find a place on your bike for an
extra water bottle. However, there are usually enough
places to fill up when riding on the road, especially
on an organized/supported ride.

In my experience, it's not the weight that matters so much
with the Camelback, but the sweat and heat on your back. It
affects how your body radiates heat and stays cool. If
you're riding in an arid climate out west it doesn't matter
as much, but it could really affect you in hot, humid
weather with big climbs.

Matt O.

 

[Nicholas]

Hey, Folks:

Do you intend to use the word "CamelBak" as a brand name, or
merely as a generic reference to a backpack water carrier?

LONE PEAK PACKS makes many different packs for the bicycle
and rider, including hydration backpacks.

http://www.lonepeakpacks.com/h2o.html

Regards, Nicholas Grieco

 

[Whinds]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Nicholas) writes:

>
>Do you intend to use the word "CamelBak" as a brand
>name, or merely as a generic reference to a backpack
>water carrier?
>
I meant the brand CamelBak. I get turned off by the cross
naming methods such as used on eBay. I have yet to see any
hydration pack as good as CamelBak's. CamelBaks are more
expensive than the others I've seen but I think their
bladders are the best. I bought a Platypus a couple of years
ago and used the bladder once.

>LONE PEAK PACKS makes many different packs for the bicycle
>and rider, including hydration backpacks.
>
>http://www.lonepeakpacks.com/h2o.html
>
Thanks for the link Nicholas, they have a lot of nice
looking packs. Have you used any of them? What does the
bladder look like? Do they have screw on fill caps?