Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Pat Lamb

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 67
16
Gear Talk / Re: Terry Touring Bikes - Coto Do├▒ana Tour
« on: August 03, 2016, 02:09:55 pm »
Oops, my bad.  Try rodbikes.com, especially the Adventure bike at http://www.rodbikes.com/catalog/adventure/adventure-main.html.┬

17
Not so, if your bike is set up right.

If you are comfortable using the drops while climbing and shifting bar end shifters with your hands still on the bars, then your bars are WAY too high.  You must have a 45 degree angle in your back while using the drops.  And a 90 degree back when using the hoods.  Your bars are way too high and probably your reach is too short.  In case you did not know, which I suspect you did not, when riding in the drops, with a slight bend in your elbow, your back should be flat, horizontal to the ground.  When your hands are on the hoods your back should be about 45 degrees to the ground.

ROFLMAO!  You're wrong, but keep the nonsense flowing, it's really entertaining.

No.  You have a very poorly fitted bike if you are comfortable climbing using the drops.  Unfortunately, poorly fitted bikes are very common.  Drops are used for getting aero.  Minimizing wind resistance.  You have to get your back flat to do that.  You cannot climb with your back flat and your eyes staring down at the road under the front wheel.  Breathing isn't as easy with your back flat.  Yet you claim to climb with your hands in the drops.  So when in the drops, you do not have a flat back.  You ride in the drops with your back at a 45 or 60 degree angle.  That is a poorly fitting bike.  I'd recommend you get a properly fitted bike.

Uh, no.  You're factually wrong about the angle my back is at in the drops.  You're also factually wrong with your assertion that "you have to get your back flat to do that."  If you remember high school geometry, the biggest difference in frontal area centered around 45 degrees, so going from 60 to 30 degrees gives you more bang for the buck than going from 45 to 15.  Sure, there's additional benefit to going lower, but the benefit is reduced as you go lower, and there's virtually no difference between 20 degrees up and horizontal.

My opinion is that you're also wrong about "correct" fitting.  Comfort and efficiency should be the guide, not some arbitrary advice that's great for time trials, but not at all appropriate for touring.  If I rode a bike fitting as you prescribe, I'd be uncomfortable, inefficient, and unable to ride all day.  Your advice is appropriate to a salesman dealing with a young racer wanna-be, the kind that wants a discount so he'll be able to get from Cat 5 to Cat 2 by the end of next season if you'll give him 50% off the latest carbon bike.  Oh, and can you throw in a power meter for free?  And arrange financing?

Or are you selling recumbents?

18
Gear Talk / Re: Terry Touring Bikes - Coto Do├▒ana Tour
« on: August 03, 2016, 10:55:54 am »
I forgot to mention, I am a 5'1", 120 lb. woman, so a 30 lb. bike with another 30-50 lbs. of gear is relatively a bigger concern to me than a bigger rider (I think). So a savings of ~ 8-10 lbs. in bike alone is substantial.

Thanks for the personal details.  I'd guessed part because of Terry's focus, but your smaller size (at least compared to a basketball power forward!) makes a big difference.

Bruce Gordon is a respected touring frame builder who has opined that light top tubes in larger sizes are a cause of shimmy.  I'd guess you'll get a 50 cm or smaller bike, so I wouldn't worry about it on a bike designed by Terry and built by Waterford.

I think Russ' comments about crossing Iowa on a loaded touring bike vs. a sportier bike illustrate a potential benefit to going custom.  You could get a lighter bike, still with the capability to use wider tires to smooth rough roads, that might be more fun to ride unloaded.  Is it worth it?  Only you and your pocketbook can say.

FWIW, of the four production touring bikes I've tried, the sprightliest was the Fuji Touring, followed by Trek 520, Novara Randonee, and the Surly LHT.  I suspect the weight follows roughly the same order, so you really would be saving close to 8 pounds going from the Surly to the Terry.

Also FWIW, you might save a bit and still get full custom through rodcycles.com or bilenky.com.

19
Gear Talk / Re: Terry Touring Bikes - Coto Do├▒ana Tour
« on: August 02, 2016, 05:20:58 pm »
If you'll excuse a few ruminations from someone who doesn't own that model...

First, do you have an idea what size bike you ride?  Full-on stock touring bikes in my size (roughly XL) run about 28 pounds.  I'm sure Terry/Waterford can get perhaps a pound to a pound and a half off frame weight by going to a better steel alloy on a smaller frame, and perhaps you can save 2-3 pounds more through reasonable component choices (lighter tires, light 26" vs. heavier 700C rims, etc.).  While I have great respect for the builder(s), I have to wonder what compromises they've made on longevity and weight-carrying capability to reduce the weight down to 20 pounds.  If you go too light on the frame, you risk getting a bike that shimmies with a heavy load at high speed.

How much do you plan to carry?  If you can keep your load down, perhaps to 30 pounds, and if you don't weigh too much (not going there, no way!), that light weight bike may work well for you.

Ms. Terry seems to understand touring, as evidenced by her eminently reasonable gearing.

Depending on front end geometry, a lighter weight bike might steer quicker and be more fun to ride unloaded than the truck-like steering of the LHT.  That would make it a better choice for training rides and fun rides before and after a long tour.

(Did I raise more questions than I answered?)

20
Not so, if your bike is set up right.

If you are comfortable using the drops while climbing and shifting bar end shifters with your hands still on the bars, then your bars are WAY too high.  You must have a 45 degree angle in your back while using the drops.  And a 90 degree back when using the hoods.  Your bars are way too high and probably your reach is too short.  In case you did not know, which I suspect you did not, when riding in the drops, with a slight bend in your elbow, your back should be flat, horizontal to the ground.  When your hands are on the hoods your back should be about 45 degrees to the ground.

ROFLMAO!  You're wrong, but keep the nonsense flowing, it's really entertaining.

21
Not so, if your bike is set up right.  I can get to the bar-ends on my bike from the bar tops or the hoods by swinging my arm down.  They're a lot more convenient that down tube shifters, at least for me.  I also ride in the drops when I'm climbing because I engage more muscles (into my lower back) there, which gives the quads and hamstrings a break.

You may say I'm an outlier, that They Say you should be in the tops while climbing, and Everybody does it that way.  Except for me, I suppose.  Doesn't that emphasize that the choice of where to put the shifters is a personal choice?

22
Gear Talk / Re: The Newer Cro-Mo Steel Frames
« on: July 31, 2016, 04:32:43 pm »
Do you have any evidence to back up the claim that Surly and Trek are not using Cro-Moly steel, or is this just your guess?  AISI 4130 specification has been around for a long time, so there's not much benefit to advertising it.  Would you buy one brand of pickup truck over another because they advertised, "We build our CroMo truck frame out of the same material all the other truck manufacturers use?"

There might be some business benefit to the contrary case.  If you've got your welding processes dialed in so you can use one of the higher carbon steels without voids or inclusions, you could advertise a quarter pound lighter frame that's just as strong as everybody else's, but you might prefer not to tell anyone that you're using 4150 steel to save that weight to preserve your corporate advantage for a few more years.

23
Routes / Re: Source for USBR GPS Data?
« on: July 30, 2016, 09:33:09 pm »
You could try the old-fashioned way, and use google maps (for instance) with something like ridewithgps to generate your own .gpx tracks (and then share them!).  Or try getting in touch with local cycling clubs and see if anyone has already done such a thing for the regions that are hardest to plan.

24
General Discussion / Re: Converting Elevation Gain, Grade to Mileage
« on: July 30, 2016, 09:30:08 pm »
Agree with John, don't go there.  It's a fairly decent task, physics-wise, complicated immensely by figuring out exactly what you're trying to calculate.  Extra energy to climb?  OK, but what about downhill -- how to account for that?  Downhill doesn't cost any energy, of course, but you do lose a lot on wind resistance.  How much do energy does it take to ride a mile on flat ground?  Then when you come to a conclusion, it's enormous.  You'll end up psyching yourself out.  And finally, what wind conditions will you use?  Hardest day of my life was into a stiff (estimated 50 mph by a guy driving a truck) headwind.  That's harder than a hill, but you can't account for unexpected headwinds (or tailwinds) in a generic model.

Analyticcycling.com has some great models if you don't take this sensible advice.  Except that they don't mess with touring cyclists, so you'll have to guess critical things like your coefficient of aerodynamic drag and aerodynamic cross section.

25
Routes / Re: TA Town List, W2E
« on: July 24, 2016, 01:49:02 pm »
Get the map set.  It lists services (grocery stores, bike shops, etc.) in each town along the way.  Plus, you'll want the maps for navigation.

26
Routes / Re: Southern Tier
« on: July 22, 2016, 09:46:19 am »
If you're really on your game, take her out for a nice dinner in St. Augustine and then leave the next day.

(From the guy who started a long tour on his anniversary -- didn't matter that I took her out for a nice dinner that evening!)

27
And just FWIW, a preference for STI is just like any other preference -- personal.
Personal?  Are you still using 27" wheels instead of 700C?  Are you using freewheels instead of cassettes?  Does your frame have 120mm spacing instead of 130 or 135mm spacing?  Are you using centerpull brakes instead of cantilever brakes?

And have you stopped beating your wife?  :)

OK, a bit more seriously, is there some reason I shouldn't be using 27" wheels with aluminum alloy rims?  (You can get those as an upgrade to the older stainless steel rims, which couldn't be stopped well in the rain with rim brakes.)  There's some performance reasons for the other examples you give.  But really, I enjoy my bar-end shifter bike as much as my Ergo shifter bike, and which shifters I use makes approximately zero difference in how well I climb.

28
If I were going to make only one upgrade for this trip, I think it would be the lower gearing on the crankset, followed closely by a change in stem length/position and/or comfier drop bars.

Again, just MHO, but if you're thinking about stem length, position, or changing drop bars, it sounds like you're not comfortable on your current setup.  If that's the case, then your best upgrade might be a fit session with a professional who knows how to fit bikes to touring cyclists.

I routinely urge lower gears for the really tough climbs (steep, long, tough wind, end of day kinds of climbs).  But you really can walk your bike for a few hundred yards if it comes to that.  When you've been on your bike all day and you ache because it's not quite dialed in right - well, that's the sort of thing that lasts a lot longer and can be prevented by a good bike fit.

29
So on touring bikes you have to make a compromise and pick a next best, second choice to make road and mountain components work together.  Thus bar end shifters.  What new bike seller is going to sell a NEW bike with now 5 year old 10 speed STI shifters, and 10 year old 9 speed rear derailleur?  This combination works but is not current.

So Russ, are you advocating "upgrading" a current LHT by putting 5 year old shifters and a 10 year old derailer on it?

And just FWIW, a preference for STI is just like any other preference -- personal.

30
GPS Discussion / Re: Best GPS device for cycling
« on: July 17, 2016, 11:03:23 am »
Given Garmin's history, it'd probably be a good idea to wait 6-9 months before buying the 520.  That'll give them time to fix the few problems they'll bother with through a new software update, and then time to fix the updated software that crashes with great regularity.

Just MHO, unless you need the latest bling, buy a new Garmin (not refurb) that's about to be outdated.  It'll last as long as the new model, and they'll have a supply of parts to see your unit through the warranty period.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 67