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 - staehpj1

Pages: 1 ... 106 107 [108] 109 110 ... 151
1606
Insect repellent spray and coils. Fold as fold may. No problem. Cold winter, mosquitoes retreat. I've tarped many many nights. Insects? Easy to defeat their purpose.
Different strokes, but I don't consider sprays and coils as an adequate solution.  I tend to be a bug magnet though and also would prefer to keep the amount of DEET or other repellents on my skin at a minimum.

On the other hand we met one guy who was doing fine and was about 70% of the way toward completing the TA with no tent, no tarp, and no bivy.  He was traveling really light and said he slept in the open, under picnic pavilions, and even in doorways of public buildings.

1607
Sorry, I read it too fast.  I rode with a guy once who used a floorless tent, pyramid shaped, and put a tarp on the ground.  Bugs can get in that setup.  I misread the previous posts and thought they were about a tent that did not come all the way down, like my partner's.  You're right.  The fly need not reach the ground, as the tent provides the seal.  Mea culpa.
No problem...  I thought maybe you misunderstood.

1608

And I would agree with it.  A couple of times, I've used a tent with even a small hole in it.  This has led to the sleepless nights of bug hell.

The bugs will find a way in if there are any breaks in the seal.  I deal with the hot, muggy problem with a tent with mest ceiling.

Not sure I follow.  What does the fly have to do with bugs getting in or not?  The inner tent's job is to keep the bugs out, the fly is to keep rain out.  You can leave the fly off entirely and remain bug free, having a gap at the bottom of the fly in no way that I can see causes bugs to get in.

I have camped a lot of nights in some of the most bug infested country with the fly left off entirely with no bug problems.

1609
you need a fly that goes all the way to the ground.
have fun-janet
I would disagree with that one at least for most of the times and places I have toured.  I found that for us on the Trans America and other shorter trips the bigger problem we had was lack of sufficient ventilation, not lack of coverage.  Even with a tent with fairly minimal overhangs on the ends and sides that were above the ground by design we needed to use sticks to prop the sides of the fly up to allow more air to circulate under.  That was a record hot summer for much of our route that year though, so in cooler wetter weather maybe I would have felt differently, but...  While we did tough out a few storms, we spend MANY hot dry nights wishing for more movement of air.

On the TA we tended to spent a lot of nights under town park pavilion roofs so we could leave the fly off.  I miss that now that I have a single wall tent.

1610
Routes / Re: When to Start?
« on: April 06, 2010, 07:32:38 am »
It usually makes sense to start later or start in the East.  I am not sure what conditions are this year though.

In any case have a great trip.

1611
Routes / Re: Katy Trail and Trans Am
« on: April 02, 2010, 05:53:56 pm »
If you go to the crazy guy on a bike site and search for "TransAmerica Katy" you will get a bunch of hits for journals.

1612
Routes / Re: Katy Trail and Trans Am
« on: April 02, 2010, 01:51:25 pm »
Different strokes, but I thought the roads AC picked were really nice and wouldn't go out of my way to hit they Katy.  That said, I should qualify by saying that I am just generally averse to bike trails in general and have not ridden the Katy Trail.

Looking at the map, it shouldn't be hard to reroute to the Katy if you choose to.  I wouldn't though.

On the eastern end it should be easy to connect to the TA at Murphysboro.  On the western end it is pretty easy to just pick secondary roads in western Missouri and Eastern Kansas.

1613
Routes / Re: Pacific Coast or new Sierra - Cascades route?
« on: April 01, 2010, 07:10:25 am »
One other consideration, since you mention you are new to touring. The coast route is a dream for a first tour. Seems like every SP has an HB site, they aren't that far apart, and services are relatively easy to obtain. I'm not sure that there are campgrounds/state parks in the volume and spacing you see on the coast in the inland areas. When you look at other routes, you can see how sweet the coast route is. Highly recommended for a first tour. And you won't be short of company.
I agree with all that, but on the other hand...  The inland route probably has more rural small town stops where finding a place to camp in a town park, church yard, or someone's yard is usually easy.

1614
Oh, and I'd also like to recommend another discovery which has made cycling much more interesting for me: the book Infrastructure: A Field Guide to the Industrial Landscape by Brian Hayes.

It lets you recognize and understand all the working man-made objects you pass by, basically.

http://www.amazon.com/Infrastructure-Field-Guide-Industrial-Landscape/dp/0393329593/ref=tmm_pap_title_0
The problem I have with this book and field guides in general is that I am not willing to have the extra weight along.  With the advent of the Kindle and other ebook readers maybe I will carry field guides at some point in the future.  It would be nice to have this book, a whole array for field guides, and some novels to read.  I wonder how well the illustrations would come across on a kindle though.

1615
We found no need to need to book ahead anywhere on the Trans America.  There were places where we called ahead the same day or the day before, but that was the exception.  The Adventure Cycling maps will give pretty good details and phone numbers for potential places to stay.

My understanding is that on the Pacific coast there are hiker/biker sites most places and no need to book ahead, but I only speak from personal experience on a small part of the coast, but the Kirkendall and Spring book listed hiker biker sites at pretty frequent intervals so I wouldn't worry.

1616
Pete, I thought you already had the air caddy.
Yes I do.  I thought you were saying there were some hard cases in the $100 range that bike shop might stock.  If there were I might use them to get our bikes home at the end of our summer tour.

The air caddy worked great when I was starting and ending the same place (with a short Amtrak leg) and it happened that I had a cooperative friend living there, but it is a bit of a hassle to knock it down to ship ahead or home so I am less inclined to use it when the beginning and end of the tour are not the same.

I am still undecided what I am doing for the Sierra Cascades trip.  There is a chance we will travel via Amtrak.  In that case it is a no-brainer that we'll take the bikes on the train.  We may ship Amtrak Express if we fly out.  Still tossing around options...

1617
General Discussion / Re: Trans Am bag question
« on: March 24, 2010, 10:41:47 am »
On our 2007 TA, I carried one kayaking sweater and wore a rain shell over it when cold.  I wore tights some of the time and could have put rain pants over them but never did.  The rain pants and jacket were real light coated nylon ones.  In camp sometimes I wore tights under some very light weight zip off leg pants.

If I were doing it again I would probably take a 20F bag in the Rockies and something lighter east of maybe Pueblo.

Clothes I would plan to be OK in the coldest temps likely if I put everything I was carrying on.  For me that means something like the following:
  • Cycling shorts (2 pair)
  • Cycling leg warmers and/or tights (1 pr)
  • Cycling jersey short sleeved (2)
  • Cycling gloves and thin liners
  • Cycling shoes
  • Socks (3 pr tech socks)
  • Helmet
  • Sunglasses (prescription)
  • Warm shirt (Immersion Research)
  • Tee shirt (1 Under Armor Heat Gear)
  • Bike hat
  • Long pants with zip off legs
  • Belt
  • Cap (thin skull cap)
  • Rain gear (cheap non-breathable Sierra Designs from REI)
  • Sandals (Crocs)
  • Running shorts

1618
There are some fairly good containers that can be had for $100, perhaps less than the shipping cost.
Can you recommend some specific ones?

1619
Routes / Re: Pacific Coast or new Sierra - Cascades route?
« on: March 23, 2010, 02:48:40 pm »
Given three weeks, a start in Seattle or Vancouver, and a finish in San Francisco I'd say just stick with the coast and save the Sierra Cascades for next year.

On the other hand...
Maybe consider taking the Sierra Cascades route to Sisters and then the TA to Florence and follow the coast south from there.  Three weeks is probably a bit tight on the time for that though.  Check the mileage and decide if that can work for you.

1620
Gear Talk / Re: looking to start touring advice.
« on: March 22, 2010, 06:04:23 pm »
No need to custom build or change a bunch of stuff, at least in my opinion.  Any of the touring bikes on the market will do fine.  You could tour on your current bike if you want to.  Folks do custom builds because they like to do them, not because there is any real need to.

I rode what I think is the cheapest real touring bike on the market (Windsor Touring $599 delivered) coast to coast (4244 miles on the Trans America) as did my two companions.  We found it worked fine stock except we felt the stock gearing was too high so we spent $80 for a Sugino XD 600 crank.  The quality of all components was fine the gearing was just too high.  I also used that bike on my Santa Fe trail tour last Spring and plan to use it this Summer to do the Sierra Cascades route.

There are a number of bikes that are well suited to touring that are at a reasonable price point.  A few are the Novara Randonee, Windsor Touring, Long Haul Trucker, and a bunch of others.  All of them are fine stock if the gearing is suitable to the route you plan to ride.

BTW the Pacific coast is a great place to tour!  Enjoy it.

Pages: 1 ... 106 107 [108] 109 110 ... 151