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?

 

I have never seen this combination before. I have seen people riding something close with upright bars (and bar ends) as an urban cruiser, but without the low gears and low seat post.
I don't catch up to many 20 something riders any more.
There are many riders who don't know about proper leg extension, bio-metrics, aerodymanics, etc. Many don't know how to adjust their disc brakes.
Maybe you could ask them why their bicycle is set up that way and/or if they would like some help adjusting their brakes.
Some just want to ride and be able to put their feet on the pavement while seated and stopped.
Catch a brand name and model that next time you pass one.

 

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

 

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

 

In article <[email protected]_s53>,
"Rocketman" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Dave Mayer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > 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, [email protected]
http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine/wiredcola/ President, Fabrizio
Mazzoleni Fan Club

 

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

 

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 19:12:13 GMT, "Dave Mayer" <[email protected]>
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 bastard.
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"
<[email protected]> 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

 

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"]

 

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

Not exactly the same species as you describe, but here is
another version of the mutant road bike:

http://www.bikecult.com/works/archive/03bicycles/bucking1.h-
tml

There was an interesting little article describing this
culture at:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1024/p05s01-ussc.html

And I thought the decision to put mid-fork fender braze-ons
on my repainted touring bike was radical.

 

Rocketman wrote:
>
> 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.

As an almost 60 something, even with a ruptured disk in my
back as of a year ago, I still have the same seat-height and
drop from the seat to the handlebars as I had 25+ years ago.
And I just bought a Selle Italia XO. I am fighting against
the ravages of time! At least for a while longer.

-=Dave=-

 

Luigi de Guzman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>
> 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

Hi, based on that theory, and assuming that I qualify as an
older guy, at 49, then the younger guys should all be
riding traditional styled, steel framed road bikes.
Certainly nothing compact. Of course I really don't fit the
above profile, as I don't have money. I either have to save
up or go into debt for my biking needs. Although I am a set
of wheels away from being set, for quite a while. Life is
Good! Jeff

 

Luigi de Guzman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>
> 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

Hi, based on that theory, and assuming that I qualify as an
older guy, at 49, then the younger guys should all be
riding traditional styled, steel framed road bikes.
Certainly nothing compact. Of course I really don't fit the
above profile, as I don't have money. I either have to save
up or go into debt for my biking needs. Although I am a set
of wheels away from being set, for quite a while. Life is
Good! Jeff

 

frkrygow <[email protected]> wrote:
>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 get it either - a long descent means a long ascent,
and after a pair of such it's not my hands that are tired...
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?

 

frkrygow <[email protected]> wrote:
>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 get it either - a long descent means a long ascent,
and after a pair of such it's not my hands that are tired...
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?

 

> - Triple crankset with ridiculously low gearing

> as they thrash along at a 40rpm cadence

How can you criticize for low gearing and too low a cadence
in the same rant?

Whitfit

 

These bikes have a 12-25 in the back with a 30-42-52 in the front. What is ridiculously low about that?

 

"David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> 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.
>
I haven't ridden discs on a road bike so can't comment on
their functionality there, BUT I have ridden discs on a mtn
bike and the difference is amazing. You stop the same wet or
dry, muddy or not, etc. ...and that was with the Avid
Mechanical discs!

I could see discs on road bikes in certain markets: upper
NW, BC, snowy/icy places, etc. For the rest of us that don't
have to deal with rain/nasties on an almost daily basis, rim
brakes are just fine.

Mike

 

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 19:12:13 GMT, "Dave Mayer" <[email protected]>
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:
>

I'll bite, but I'll offer a simultaneous translation for the
un-anointed.

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

[translation] I ride a classic steel frame which mashes my
balls if I try to stand over it.

>- Fattish tires with treads

[translation] I like 20-23mm tyres, possibly tubs.

>- Oversized alu frame with a garish paint job

[translation] I ride a classic steel frame which is stove
enameled in muted tones.

>- Triple crankset with ridiculously low gearing

[translation] I ride a classic steel bike with a campy
double up front.

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

[translation] I ride a classic steel bike with the bars set
so low my nose scrapes on the front tyre. It worked for
Merckx after all!

>- Disk brakes?!?

[translation] I ride a classic steel frame fitted with long-
drop side pull brakes.

>- Low spoke count wheels.

[translation] I bought my tyres off a tandem enthusiast. On
a clear day you can see some daylight between my spokes..

Enough already: I think we get the picture by now.

>
>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.

What mighty victories! The stout old ladies and cripples
must be left choking in your dust!

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

If so, it's a hell of your own making, and you're
welcome to it.

Vic.

 

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 19:50:48 -0500, "David L. Johnson"
<[email protected]> 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.

And ice. Here's a picture from this winter:

http://jkk1.scm.no/bilder/hpim0616.jpg

Needless to say, my v-brakes didn't work very well...