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 - adventurepdx

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31
FYI: The Bike Inn in Clatskanie has closed and camping is no longer allowed in the City Park. However there is camping at Hudson-Parcher County Park a few miles west of Rainier.

Dang, that's a shame. I had hoped to check out the Bike Inn at some point, I heard a lot of good things about it.

There's been a couple other casualties, too. The bike hostel in Baker City, Oregon only lasted a season, then (from what I heard) the owners decided to go the standard AirBnB route. Appears that the place in Mt Vernon, Ore. is also gone.

Still looks like the Spoke'n Hostel in Mitchell, Ore. and the bike hostel in Dayville, Ore. are going strong. Then again, they are non-profits in churches. It's probably a tough business model to only appeal to cyclists, even if you are on the Trans-Am.

General Discussion / Re: Bike Shop in Astoria OR
« on: April 17, 2019, 01:59:32 pm »
I don't think there is any other bike shop in Astoria proper beyond Bikes and Beyond.

Google search brings up a shop across Young's Bay from Astoria in Warrenton called Bike Envy.

General Discussion / Re: Warm Showers Reliability
« on: April 13, 2019, 08:37:25 pm »
Good response  :)
Finally, we had a bad year in 2017 with Warm Showers, 4 requests, one looking to do a cider tour with their friends, nope. Another turned up on foot, didn't even own a bike and had no intention of ever hosting. Another did the contact multiple contact thing (hence the comment) The last though was the worst. They booked , we agreed, and as we do we prepared the room, I arranged an earlier finish from work and we bought something for dinner (OK it's not in the rules, but that's what we do) She E Mailed 2 hours before arrival saying they were feeling strong, so would stay somewhere else.
When it works it's a beautiful thing, we used the original USA list in 1999 before Warm Showers. Maybe 250 Nationwide and we stayed with 5 families on a 7 month trip. It added to the holiday and we have fond memories of every stay. Today 200 sign ups to warm showers when an article talks about it, yes folks it's too big, what's needed is a core list again.

I agree with mucknort, a "reboot" isn't needed, it's about parameters.

I've used WS for almost 10 years. The good experiences outweigh the bad, on both the hosting and hosted side. As for hosting I try to be as clear in my profile description of what i can/cannot do:
  • I try to give a good li'l snapshot of me and my touring history. So many WS profiles are barely two sentences and no photo.
  • I note that I need a certain amount of warning to host. I'd rather have the bandwidth to be able to engage with my guest, rather than simply giving them a bed or floor space.
  • After getting one request by someone who was not on tour, I made it explicit in my description that I'd only be hosting people on a bike tour
  • And I keep my address and phone number turned OFF so I don't get anyone randomly showing up or those last minute text messages

General Discussion / Re: Updated ACA website
« on: February 27, 2019, 01:43:05 pm »
It may be old-fart-ian of me, but it's really nice to have a navigation bar up top... And doubly so if you're looking at it on a mobile device with a small screen and no scroll bar.

I just checked the main website on my phone, and it is optimized for mobile. In fact, the navigation bar and search are all at the top.

However, this forum is definitely not optimized for mobile. It’s a chore to reply on the phone.

The new website looks OK to me. My big gripe is the ACA blog: I think they’ve changed it at least twice over the past decade, using a whole new platform each time. I remember it being blogspot years ago and I don’t know what the platform is now. It’s a pain because they pretty much “kill” off the old blog each time they redo it. I’ve linked to old ACA blog posts, and those links are now dead. I don’t know if they’ve migrated these posts to the new platforms or not, and even if they did, it’s a pain to repair all these dead links.

General Discussion / Re: Best tire width for TransAmerica (middle) route
« on: January 18, 2019, 03:28:28 pm »
I’ve had success with 32’s on the C&O and GAP trails and currently have brand new 35 width Schwalbe Marathons but I initially thought that might be overkill on roads? On further reflection, I suppose a little more width over the long haul helps with comfort and durability and opposed to losing a smidgen of speed. Sound right to you? I appreciate your input:)

Yep! I couldn't feel any speed lost. Anyways, it's touring, not racing.

General Discussion / Re: Best tire width for TransAmerica (middle) route
« on: January 18, 2019, 02:40:33 pm »
You're probably going to get a lot of different answers, but my take:
Go with the widest tire you possibly can.

Schwalbe Marathon Plus will be a good choice in the way of durability and flat protection.

General Discussion / Re: Impact of Bikers (and hikers) on a small town
« on: December 25, 2018, 06:29:45 pm »
Looks like that link is wonky, this one should work:

General Discussion / Re: San Juan Islands - what's to like?
« on: September 18, 2018, 02:17:11 pm »
I like riding the San Juan Islands. I've been going there pretty much every year to bike tour since 2013. Like the other folks in the "like" column, I dig its peaceful roads and bucolic scenery. I realize that I'm not going to get an awesome view of the water around every corner, but I'm okay with it and am appreciative when I do get that view.

Also, the islands have a nice assortment of campgrounds. The county parks on San Juan, Lopez, and Shaw have hiker/biker sites, plus Spencer Spit State Park on Lopez. (I forget if Moran State Park has them, I've never camped there.) There's also some "bike turnouts" and rest areas on some of the busier roads.

It's easy to get the idea that "coastal" or "island" means you are going to see water all the time. The reality is different. In the case of the San Juans, they didn't build ring roads around the islands, and there's only random spots where the roads follow the shore.

I feel it's the same thing with the Pacific Coast. When people get the idea of touring down the coast, some think it's going to look like this all the time:

But in reality you'll see a lot of this as well:

General Discussion / Re: Warm Showers Reliability
« on: July 07, 2018, 02:06:46 pm »
This is the crux of the matter for me...Hosts most often seem to want some notice and my decisions on the fly style just doesn't allow for that.  Your style may be different and none of that may apply.

There ARE hosts that are okay with last minute notice. I've had good luck with that a few times. It seems like people who live in rural areas (more likely to be home every night) are more welcoming to it than city-dwellers like me. I'd still take a look at Warmshowers and see what the "Preferred Notice" is for a particular guest.

General Discussion / Re: Warm Showers Reliability
« on: July 06, 2018, 08:45:42 pm »
Six times I tried using Warm Showers.  One was successful.  Three times I got turned down.  Twice I didn't hear back.  This was the first trip where I attempted using Warm Showers.  Perhaps my request for accommodations wasn't well-written.  Perhaps 48 hours is too short a window...

We have hosted many cyclists on WS.  Having cyclists stay was a great experience.  By and large, a great bunch of people...I think one issue that may be troublesome is advance notice.  Many cyclists had a habit of contacting us on the same day, but with our schedules, we needed at least a day's notice.  Preferably two.  If we could fit them in on short notice, we would, but it seemed to be happening more often.  So we took a long term break from hosting.

48 hours can be short notice for many people, so I can see why you didn't get a lot of responses on your tour, jwrushman. Plus, while there is a way to turn "off" hosting, most folks probably aren't going to do that if they are just gone a day or two, which means maybe a few of those non-responses happened when the host was out of town.

This is one of the reasons why WS asks you to post "Preferred Notice" in your profile. When I'm on the road, I check that if I'm asking for something soon (within 48 hours) because I don't want to bother folks. I also put my 72 hours advance notice prominently on my profile, since I'm not always home and I have to check in with roommates first. Before I did that, I'd frequently get same day/next day requests, which was getting frustrating. Thankfully, there are plenty of options for staying in Portland, and there are many hosts that can/don't mind hosting on short notice.

General Discussion / Re: County Parks - No Hiker/Biker Sites?
« on: July 04, 2018, 04:06:43 pm »
Just wanted to ask whether all CPs do not have hiker / Biker sites and whether all State Parks do?

No and no.

Okay, to add more depth: State parks on the Pacific Coast (WA/OR/CA) generally have hiker/biker sites. (I say "generally" because I have seen a few in the past that didn't have hiker/biker, like Oswald West in Oregon. But that campground is closed, so no need to worry.) Inland? Not as much. There are some, but they are scattered.

It's less likely that county parks, whether on the Pacific Coast, or elsewhere, will have hiker/biker sites. But there are some county parks that do have hiker/biker: Off the top of my head, the coastal parks in Tillamook County Oregon like Barview Jetty have a hiker/biker, and I remember staying at the hiker/biker site in the Gualala County Park on the California Coast (Sonoma/Mendocino Co. Line). However, don't expect the rates and policies to be as consistent as the state parks. That hiker/biker site in Barview Jetty cost almost $20 when I stayed there last year, which is almost three times as much as what I paid at Nehalem Bay State Park the previous night!

Generally, the likelihood of hiker/biker sites and "no turn away" policies is higher on the Pacific Coast, since there's a high number of bike tourists. When you move further from a highly (bike) trafficked area, the likelihood of hiker/biker sites decreases.

The First edition of the Thorness book is 2017.  The Spring/Kirkendall book apparently is out of print, as suggested by others. 

Technically, both are part of the same series, published by the Mountaineers. Thorness basically took over the series from Spring/Kirkendall.

I just found Cycling the Pacific Coast: The Complete Guide from Canada to Mexico book on amazon. and next time that I order on Amazon and I will buy that book

Make sure it's the current Thorness edition. The older ones are fine as a historical artifact, but a bit outdated and not as thorough as the current book.

I am cycling the route this summer ie part of it and have only ordered the tracks - am using Garmin etrex 30x. I do not see on the road the extra value of the maps since they very likely will be identical. What I did however was buying two books : Bicycling the Pacific Coast byVicky Spring & Tom Kirkendall and Cycling the Pacific Coast: the complete guide from Canada to Mexico by Bill Thorness. With the use of the aca tracks and these books I created my own route along the coast. I especially like the latter book for it is the most recent and gives good tips of things to see/ do along the route.

The Thorness book is basically the new edition of the Kirkendall/Spring, as Bill has "taken over" the title. I'd definitely lean heavier on the new Thorness book, as it's much more thorough than the Kirkendall/Spring books, and the last edition of the Kirkendall/Spring book came out in either 2005 or 2006.

General Discussion / Re: Custom touring bkie vs. mass produced
« on: April 04, 2018, 04:36:36 pm »
I started off with an off the shelf touring advised that most off the shelf touring bikes are terrible touring bikes.  My off the shelf touring bike was a great ride, until you put panniers on it, at which point it wiggled and was unstable to ride.

When exactly did you start out with an "off the shelf" touring bike? I got my Surly Long Haul Trucker 10 years ago and it was very stable to ride with panniers, front and back. While I had the bike built from a bare frame/fork, I've heard that the gearing on the stock builds has been good for touring.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31