Show us your bicycles!

[Tom C]

What bike type do most experienced riders prefer for gravel? I live where there are lots of rails to trail gravel, and few paved trails. Road with cars is OK in a group, but for one or two riding together, a road is just not as safe as a trail. After a long (well, 50 miles is long for me) ride on a gravel trail, I feel pretty beat up. What is good for minimizing the effects of a rough gravel trail in terms of comfort?

 

[Tom C]

E-shift will let you shift multiple gears quickly.

 

[Doodski]

What bike type do most experienced riders prefer for gravel? I live where there are lots of rails to trail gravel, and few paved trails. Road with cars is OK in a group, but for one or two riding together, a road is just not as safe as a trail. After a long (well, 50 miles is long for me) ride on a gravel trail, I feel pretty beat up. What is good for minimizing the effects of a rough gravel trail in terms of comfort?

Aside from full suspension maybe a gel seat?

 

[rdenney]

So for shifting you have a lever that positions the gear changer mechanism and no ratcheting stuff like today's gear? I actually prefer that over the ratcheting shifter. One can jump the chain 3 or 4 gears in one shift with a kick of the pedal. Can't do that on any ratcheting shifter I've seen.

No, these two bikes have indexed shifting. Mine uses Campagnolo Ergo shifters, far and away my preference over Shimano. Mine is old 8-speed stuff. The lever behind the brake lever tightens the cable (shifts to larger cogs in the back and larger chainrings in the front), and there is a thumb button that goes the other way, but potentially more than one click at a time. The wife's bike has Shimano Clarus stuff, also 8-speed (which is what I can fit between the rear dropouts on these old bikes), but with the Shimano approach of using the brake lever itself in sideways motion to shift to larger cogs or chainrings and the smaller lever behind it for going the other way. The Clarus stuff was made until fairly recently and is still pretty available. The 8-speed Ergo stuff I take good care of. (Which reminds me--I need to keep looking around for spares.)

My good road bike (which is my preference for rides only on pavement) is an Eddy Merckx MX-Leader, and it has Campy Chorus Ergo stuff with 8 speeds. No triple, of course. My time-trial bike, last used years ago when I was doing triathlon, has Campy gears on it, but Shimano down-tube indexed shifters mounted on the aerobars.

The only bike I have with friction shifters is the bike I raced in college. It's a custom frame by Bill Moore in Houston in 1977. He made forks for Exxon (for the Graftek) and also custom frames for some big names of the day. I was working as a mechanic at Daniel Boone Cycles in Houston that summer and knew all those guys--Campagnolo's import warehouse was in Houston at the time. It's all Campy Nuovo Record stuff. Every now and again, I take it out to remind people (including myself) that the old stuff still works. I get sentimental about it easily--no telling how many thousands of miles are on that bike, and it reminds me of some of the best times of my life.

But it's hard to ride in these parts--that gearing was for the flattish parts of Texas, not the hilly parts of Virginia. 42-52 in the front, and a 13-18 six-speed Regina Oro freewheel in the back. Note the red jockey wheels on the Campy derailleur--we were subject to myth and lore in those days, too. Those were "Bullseye" jockey wheels with sealed ball bearings instead of the (slighly) shielded plastic bushings usually found on those things. About like the difference between a SINAD of 118 versus 120. That bike has a Phil Wood sealed-bearing bottom bracket, too, but that was mostly for ease of alignment and maintenance. I still have the custom Phil spline tool for the lock rings that bottom bracket uses.

Those wheels take sew-up tires and fat tires are definitely not an option on that bike (even less on the Eddy Merckx and my other bikes).

Rick "good times" Denney

 

[Somafunk]

Had a fair few bikes over the years as I raced mtb/road time trials competitively for 20+ years (from 1990) plus worked as mtb skills coach/mtb guide, no longer ride due to rapidly advancing spms but thought I’d throw a pics up in no order of ownership/year. Loads more bikes n’ pics but they’re on a hd in cupboard and I can’t reach it.

I pretty much only rode single speed bikes, whether that be mtb or road but in the last few years my ms progressed rapidly whilst undiagnosed so had to ride geared bikes then finally electric.

saved my fav bike for last, SOULCRAFT custom built frame from Sean at SOULCRAFT in California

Unfortunately I broke it whilst racing at the single speed world championship, yep……that is my blood on the down tube…..you don’t want to see the pic of my face afterwards. I got the frame repaired though as that’s the beauty of steel bikes.

 

[Chrispy]

A couple years ago gave up on my 53/39, changed to a 50/34 for better climbing capabilities and really didn't use the highest gear much except on downhills, and the 50 is almost as good anyways.

Look up record setting bicycle chainring or similar if you want to see some giant chainrings!

 

[Chrispy]

Had a fair few bikes over the years as I raced mtb/road time trials competitively for 20+ years (from 1990) plus worked as mtb skills coach/mtb guide, no longer ride due to rapidly advancing spms but thought I’d throw a pics up in no order of ownership/year. Loads more bikes n’ pics but they’re on a hd in cupboard and I can’t reach it.

I pretty much only rode single speed bikes, whether that be mtb or road but in the last few years my ms progressed rapidly whilst undiagnosed so had to ride geared bikes then finally electric.

saved my fav bike for last, SOULCRAFT custom built frame from Sean at SOULCRAFT in California

Unfortunately I broke it whilst racing at the single speed world championship, yep……that is my blood on the down tube…..you don’t want to see the pic of my face afterwards. I got the frame repaired though as that’s the beauty of steel bikes.

Quite the collection! Very nice....and no, I don't want to see that face, have seen them in person before. Steel is real!

 

[socksrolleddown]

New Gravel - Cannondale

My first self build - All from ebay used components or ex-demo

My Giant Defy - First Bike

Roubaix - This will be going with me on the RideLondon100 this weekend

My new build - Kinesis Aithein Disc Evo

 

[Loathecliff]

 

[rdenney]

A couple years ago gave up on my 53/39, changed to a 50/34 for better climbing capabilities and really didn't use the highest gear much except on downhills, and the 50 is almost as good anyways.

Look up record setting bicycle chainring or similar if you want to see some giant chainrings!

Especially for speed records back in the day.

But I was acquainted with John Howard in the 70's--legendary road and triathlon cyclist who lived in Houston at the time. That guy was known for pushing monster gears at lower RPM's, and I recall one photo of the U.S. Time Trial Team in which he participated where he was the only rider in the photo on the big chainring. He was known to use chainrings of 60 teeth at times for just regular road cycling.

John Howard May 1969 by ddsiple, on Flickr

He also set the paced land speed record in 1985, and that one held up for a decade. That bike used an intermediate reduction gear. He had to hang on to his derny until gaining enough speed to be able to turn the pedals. 152.2 mph! The ball on the handlebar kept him from bumping into his derny in ways that could cause disaster.

His use of a gearing was a different style of pedaling than is in use now, but fit (literally) with his overall size. He was taller with longer legs than most champion cyclists.

When the Seven Eleven team came along, and then Greg Lemond, guys like Howie switched to more specialty stuff to keep themselves on podiums. That's when Howie moved to triathlon, and after that to the land speed record, and after that to the Race Across America.

Rick "halcyon days" Denney

 

[Chrispy]

Especially for speed records back in the day.

But I was acquainted with John Howard in the 70's--legendary road and triathlon cyclist who lived in Houston at the time. That guy was known for pushing monster gears at lower RPM's, and I recall one photo of the U.S. Time Trial Team in which he participated where he was the only rider in the photo on the big chainring. He was known to use chainrings of 60 teeth at times for just regular road cycling.

John Howard May 1969 by ddsiple, on Flickr

He also set the paced land speed record in 1985, and that one held up for a decade. That bike used an intermediate reduction gear. He had to hang on to his derny until gaining enough speed to be able to turn the pedals. 152.2 mph! The ball on the handlebar kept him from bumping into his derny in ways that could cause disaster.

His use of a gearing was a different style of pedaling than is in use now, but fit (literally) with his overall size. He was taller with longer legs than most champion cyclists.

When the Seven Eleven team came along, and then Greg Lemond, guys like Howie switched to more specialty stuff to keep themselves on podiums. That's when Howie moved to triathlon, and after that to the land speed record, and after that to the Race Across America.

Rick "halcyon days" Denney

I found some good pics but firefox keeps freezing up when I try and save the images....that lower one came up. Found a couple really giant ones used in other record attempts.....

Kinda remember there's a very few guys in the pro peloton these days pushing huge chainrings....maybe Tony Martin for tts?

 

[rdenney]

I found some good pics but firefox keeps freezing up when I try and save the images....that lower one came up. Found a couple really giant ones used in other record attempts.....

Kinda remember there's a very few guys in the pro peloton these days pushing huge chainrings....maybe Tony Martin for tts?

Could be, but the focus now is more on spin and jump than on force with tall gears.

I don't keep up with the pro peloton and haven't for a very long time. I sort-of got a little interested again during Armstrong's run, but though I never knew him personally, we had many mutual friends from my time in Dallas. Let's just say he did not enjoy a sterling reputation, even by the standards of bicycle racers. As a breed, bike racers tend to be self-absorbed, but given the physical demands of it, it's not hard to understand why. I was never fast enough that I didn't need humility at every turn But after his fall from grace I haven't been back for any spectating.

Edit: Been meaning to mention that the small cogs used to be limited to 13 or 14 teeth, but now go down to 11 teeth even with regular stuff, and 10 or even nine teeth with some stuff. The change from 13 to 11 is like going from a 50-tooth chainring to a 58-tooth chainring. So, the tallest gears are probably just as tall, but still use smaller chainrings. The smallest cogs these days are often coupled with single chainrings to prevent the need for a front derailleur.

Rick "who would rather ride than watch others ride" Denney

 

[Chrispy]

Could be, but the focus now is more on spin and jump than on force with tall gears.

I don't keep up with the pro peloton and haven't for a very long time. I sort-of got a little interested again during Armstrong's run, but though I never knew him personally, we had many mutual friends from my time in Dallas. Let's just say he did not enjoy a sterling reputation, even by the standards of bicycle racers. As a breed, bike racers tend to be self-absorbed, but given the physical demands of it, it's not hard to understand why. I was never fast enough that I didn't need humility at every turn But after his fall from grace I haven't been back for any spectating.

Edit: Been meaning to mention that the small cogs used to be limited to 13 or 14 teeth, but now go down to 11 teeth even with regular stuff, and 10 or even nine teeth with some stuff. The change from 13 to 11 is like going from a 50-tooth chainring to a 58-tooth chainring. So, the tallest gears are probably just as tall, but still use smaller chainrings. The smallest cogs these days are often coupled with single chainrings to prevent the need for a front derailleur.

Rick "who would rather ride than watch others ride" Denney

I have 10-50 cassettes on two of my mountain bikes....but a fairly small chainring Yeah Lance put me off the pro stuff for a while....but every sport will have its cheaters I suppose. By many accounts he is an asshole, tho.

 

[rdenney]

I have 10-50 cassettes on two of my mountain bikes....but a fairly small chainring Yeah Lance put me off the pro stuff for a while....but every sport will have its cheaters I suppose. By many accounts he is an asshole, tho.

Mountain bikes for single-track really benefit from small chainrings, because it increases the ground clearance between the front and rear wheels.

Of course, any time I was presented with terrain that would take advantage of that, I would fall and shed blood.

Rick "a confirmed roadie" Denney

 

[Chrispy]

Mountain bikes for single-track really benefit from small chainrings, because it increases the ground clearance between the front and rear wheels.

Of course, any time I was presented with terrain that would take advantage of that, I would fall and shed blood.

Rick "a confirmed roadie" Denney

I use a 32 single up front on those bikes but it hasn't really changed things much in terms of clearance. Still have traditional triples on other bikes tho for much of my riding the large chainring isn't much help, and I really like the 1x12s. Many today have relatively low bottom brackets, and crankarm strikes are to me a bigger problem, particularly on technical singletrack. Then again I was never one much for situations where the chainring size becomes much of an issue, like log hopping/crossing....

 

[Tom C]

My gravel ride is a Specialized Diverge. It’s got a little plastic flex thingy in the seat stem, but that’s it. I have people telling me front shock/suspension doesn’t help much because it doesn’t often activate on flat gravel trail. Money’s in the rear suspension, and wide, supple tires, so they say. Wondering what other experienced riders think.

 

[digitalfrost]

Mountain bikes for single-track really benefit from small chainrings, because it increases the ground clearance between the front and rear wheels.

When I moved from my old 90s hardtail to a modern fully, I was really surprised the pedals would strike rocks on my standard trails. People told me it was normal and I should either align my pedalling to the rocks or "studder step" the pedals. I simply installed 165mm cranks, problem solved.

 

[rdenney]

My gravel ride is a Specialized Diverge. It’s got a little plastic flex thingy in the seat stem, but that’s it. I have people telling me front shock/suspension doesn’t help much because it doesn’t often activate on flat gravel trail. Money’s in the rear suspension, and wide, supple tires, so they say. Wondering what other experienced riders think.

I think it depends on what you mean by "gravel". There is a big difference between a single-track trail intended for walkers and bikers that happens to have some gravel on it and a gravel road that is reasonably maintained for routine traffic.

The purpose of suspension is to keep the tire in correct contact with the road to avoid losing traction or control. Comfort for the passenger is a side benefit, but that isn't the main thing. Full suspension can keep the wheels on the ground except when you want to be in the air.

On gravel roads designed for regular traffic (rather than single-track), the bumps are usually not severe enough to need much suspension at all. If not needed to sustain contact, suspension, particularly if it is damped, eats energy. What you save from sustaining contact has to justify what you lose in heat in the shock absorber, or in winding up a spring the unwinding of which does not result in forward motion.

My regular road frame with fat tires is much easier to control on gravel and dirt roads intended for regular traffic than my mountain bike with front suspension. If I see a bump or pothole that's going to hurt the old posterior, I just stand up in the pedals and let my legs provide the shock absorption.

For the kind of hard riding I do when the ride is supposed to be a workout, suspension pumps a lot and I end up going a lot slower.

Rick "surprised my how much better the gravel bike was on dirt roads than the MTB" Denney

 

[Chrispy]

Even tho we have 6x the mileage of gravel roads vs single track trails here in the surrounding forest, gravel roads nor bikes never have appealed much to me (and they wouldn't be much good on the single track either). I'd think fatter tires would be the best you can do without suspension, but I don't think just a fork would do the trick particularly either. Makes me wonder, do the Paris-Roubaix riders use suspension much now that they've moved to fatter tires?

 

[Tom C]

I think it depends on what you mean by "gravel". There is a big difference between a single-track trail intended for walkers and bikers that happens to have some gravel on it and a gravel road that is reasonably maintained for routine traffic.

The purpose of suspension is to keep the tire in correct contact with the road to avoid losing traction or control. Comfort for the passenger is a side benefit, but that isn't the main thing. Full suspension can keep the wheels on the ground except when you want to be in the air.

On gravel roads designed for regular traffic (rather than single-track), the bumps are usually not severe enough to need much suspension at all. If not needed to sustain contact, suspension, particularly if it is damped, eats energy. What you save from sustaining contact has to justify what you lose in heat in the shock absorber, or in winding up a spring the unwinding of which does not result in forward motion.

My regular road frame with fat tires is much easier to control on gravel and dirt roads intended for regular traffic than my mountain bike with front suspension. If I see a bump or pothole that's going to hurt the old posterior, I just stand up in the pedals and let my legs provide the shock absorption.

For the kind of hard riding I do when the ride is supposed to be a workout, suspension pumps a lot and I end up going a lot slower.

Rick "surprised my how much better the gravel bike was on dirt roads than the MTB" Denney

Thank you for the considered reply.
I’ve always preferred pavement myself. When I lived in Minneapolis and Kansas City it was great, because you could do a fifty mile ride on a trail dedicated to bicycle and foot traffic. No motors.
I’ve since moved, and in more rural areas of Missouri and Wisconsin where I live now, there are few paved trails, but lots of old railroad paths where the track has been torn out, and you ride on the rail bed. In Missouri the Department of Natural Resources calls it “pug,” but most people just call it gravel. It’s finer gravel than you find on a road dedicated to motor vehicles. Costs a lot less to build than a paved trail, and there are many miles of it around. You can ride from Kansas City to St. Louis on such a trail, for example. Peaceful and scenic to ride, but not a challenge. Mostly flat, no climbs, which is why my wife likes to ride them. But not nearly as smooth and comfortable as a paved road.
So what you say explains why the gravel bikes are designed the way they are. Guess I just need to optimize the tires.