Bigger Must Be Better, Right?: Part Two

Goin off the rails on a crazy train..

Yesterday's post got a lot of attention. If you read it, you may have noticed I didn't delve into the price of fat bike tires. Well, today I am going to address that subject.

A lot of folks out there are aghast, flummoxed, and furious about why and how much folks charge for these tires. I think it is a bunch of crazy talk. Look....here's the deal, plain and simple:

You don't "need" these tires, and you don't have to buy them either. 

Really. You could do without the fatties, and without your fat bike altogether. It is called "perspective". I could put it a lot of different, poignant, and significant ways, but just stop and think about this, cause....you know- you're smart enough to figure that out. I do not need to be "Mr. Smartypants" with the witty quote or example here.

Don't like the prices? You can vote with your dollar. Do not push play. Simple.

Then there is the argument that there is a lack of competition. What? Four years ago, how many fat bike tires could you buy that were different than each other? Right...... We're arguing about prices when we have awesome choices and forgetting they weren't available just a short time ago. Back then you'd likely have paid gladly just to get something other than an Endomorph, is what I am thinking. So what if most everything is coming from under one big roof? I'm just glad we can even get a hold of these things at this point.

So, whatever people. These tires are expensive, yes. But name a specialty sporting goods product that is high quality, made for a niche audience, and is cheap to buy. You are not going to find many things out there that aren't expensive that are pointed at specific target audiences for specific high performance activities. That's what fat bike products are- a tiny market with some kick butt product made especially for them. It is what it is.

The silver lining is that fat bikes as a whole are gaining popularity in many pockets of the country. If things continue to grow, the numbers will take care of the issues with pricing someday down the road. Kind of like........29"ers. Remember?

Bigger Must Be Better, Right?: Part Two

Goin off the rails on a crazy train..

Yesterday's post got a lot of attention. If you read it, you may have noticed I didn't delve into the price of fat bike tires. Well, today I am going to address that subject.

A lot of folks out there are aghast, flummoxed, and furious about why and how much folks charge for these tires. I think it is a bunch of crazy talk. Look....here's the deal, plain and simple:

You don't "need" these tires, and you don't have to buy them either. 

Really. You could do without the fatties, and without your fat bike altogether. It is called "perspective". I could put it a lot of different, poignant, and significant ways, but just stop and think about this, cause....you know- you're smart enough to figure that out. I do not need to be "Mr. Smartypants" with the witty quote or example here.

Don't like the prices? You can vote with your dollar. Do not push play. Simple.

Then there is the argument that there is a lack of competition. What? Four years ago, how many fat bike tires could you buy that were different than each other? Right...... We're arguing about prices when we have awesome choices and forgetting they weren't available just a short time ago. Back then you'd likely have paid gladly just to get something other than an Endomorph, is what I am thinking. So what if most everything is coming from under one big roof? I'm just glad we can even get a hold of these things at this point.

So, whatever people. These tires are expensive, yes. But name a specialty sporting goods product that is high quality, made for a niche audience, and is cheap to buy. You are not going to find many things out there that aren't expensive that are pointed at specific target audiences for specific high performance activities. That's what fat bike products are- a tiny market with some kick butt product made especially for them. It is what it is.

The silver lining is that fat bikes as a whole are gaining popularity in many pockets of the country. If things continue to grow, the numbers will take care of the issues with pricing someday down the road. Kind of like........29"ers. Remember?

Bigger Must Be Better, Right?

My Perfect Combo" BFL frt, Knard rear on 82's

There used to be one fat bike tire- the venerable, (and discontinued), Endomorph 3.7"er. Lots of things got done with that tire, and many people's complaint was that it was too squarish, causing "self steering" traits.

Then came "Larry". In the 3.8" size, people about went ga-ga when it hit the scene. It was sooooo much better than the Endo, that folks wondered if anymore Endo's would ever be sold. Funny isn't it? Now with the Bud, Lou, Big Fat Larry, and the soon to be released 3.8" Knard, no one talks about 3.8" Larrys anymore! 

I think that is telling, because in terms of this fat biking scene, Surly has whipped up a veritable frenzy over the next bigger, badder fat bike tire. And hey, maybe you need that huge, gnarly chunk-o-rubber. But ya know what? I bet most folks don't. Not even close.

We didn't have a winter like we did in 2010/'11 last winter, but that was the winter I got my first fat bike, and it came with 3.8" Larrys. You know what? I thought I didn't really need bigger tires. I thought I needed wider rims. I was riding some deep, compacted snow on those 3.8'ers, and I was doing really well. I probably would have done even better if I knew what I know now for technique, but I didn't think I needed bigger tires.

3.8" Larrys, floating...

 Then a series of events occurred that led to my acquiring some Big Fat Larrys. I put those on the Snow Dog, and my need for wider rims went away. Yes, they are bigger tires, so you could say I "needed" them, but one way or the other, rims or tires, the deal was that I needed just a wee bit more float, and I was good. Still am too.

I am still curious about what I would get with 100mm wide rims, but ya know- I ride a fat bike all year. I use it as an "all terrain bike", so I kind of think that with the tires that I have, bigger rims won't be better, just heavier. Maybe less adept at mountain biking too.

Then there are those monstrosities called Bud, Lou, and Nate. I have to say that I have not ever thought my Larry was deficient for traction here. Maybe if I lived somewhere else, I'd be singing a different tune, but a lighter weight, less blocky treaded tire is always better here, no matter if it is a 29"er, fat bike, or for 26"er bikes.  So again, bigger isn't better, just heavier and slower.

Right now, my thoughts are to just keep running BFL's on 82's for winter, and get a BFL/Knard 3.8"er combo for the other bike, and run that all year long. Until then, I'll just be pretty satisfied running the Larry 3.8"ers and I'll let you others scramble for those crazy, heavy, super knobby fat bike tires.
 

Bigger Must Be Better, Right?

My Perfect Combo" BFL frt, Knard rear on 82's

There used to be one fat bike tire- the venerable, (and discontinued), Endomorph 3.7"er. Lots of things got done with that tire, and many people's complaint was that it was too squarish, causing "self steering" traits.

Then came "Larry". In the 3.8" size, people about went ga-ga when it hit the scene. It was sooooo much better than the Endo, that folks wondered if anymore Endo's would ever be sold. Funny isn't it? Now with the Bud, Lou, Big Fat Larry, and the soon to be released 3.8" Knard, no one talks about 3.8" Larrys anymore! 

I think that is telling, because in terms of this fat biking scene, Surly has whipped up a veritable frenzy over the next bigger, badder fat bike tire. And hey, maybe you need that huge, gnarly chunk-o-rubber. But ya know what? I bet most folks don't. Not even close.

We didn't have a winter like we did in 2010/'11 last winter, but that was the winter I got my first fat bike, and it came with 3.8" Larrys. You know what? I thought I didn't really need bigger tires. I thought I needed wider rims. I was riding some deep, compacted snow on those 3.8'ers, and I was doing really well. I probably would have done even better if I knew what I know now for technique, but I didn't think I needed bigger tires.

3.8" Larrys, floating...

 Then a series of events occurred that led to my acquiring some Big Fat Larrys. I put those on the Snow Dog, and my need for wider rims went away. Yes, they are bigger tires, so you could say I "needed" them, but one way or the other, rims or tires, the deal was that I needed just a wee bit more float, and I was good. Still am too.

I am still curious about what I would get with 100mm wide rims, but ya know- I ride a fat bike all year. I use it as an "all terrain bike", so I kind of think that with the tires that I have, bigger rims won't be better, just heavier. Maybe less adept at mountain biking too.

Then there are those monstrosities called Bud, Lou, and Nate. I have to say that I have not ever thought my Larry was deficient for traction here. Maybe if I lived somewhere else, I'd be singing a different tune, but a lighter weight, less blocky treaded tire is always better here, no matter if it is a 29"er, fat bike, or for 26"er bikes.  So again, bigger isn't better, just heavier and slower.

Right now, my thoughts are to just keep running BFL's on 82's for winter, and get a BFL/Knard 3.8"er combo for the other bike, and run that all year long. Until then, I'll just be pretty satisfied running the Larry 3.8"ers and I'll let you others scramble for those crazy, heavy, super knobby fat bike tires.
 

Trans Iowa V9: Course Recon Report #1

Sunday way before dawn I arose and collected Jeremy from his abode to hit the gravels and see what I had come up with for a course for the next Trans Iowa. Following is the story on the day, and some glimpses into what the course may hold in store for those intrepid T.I.V9 cyclists next April.

Somewhere in Iowa before dawn.

The plan was to drive a large loop that would start with parts of the course that would come later, then skip over a section of territory to the beginning of the course in Grinnell, and drive back on course to a point that was closest to home and return for the day. Jeremy was to be my note taker/navigator, and I was helping to look out for signage and ascertain how the course was going to be for difficulty, which will affect the time cut offs.

We got to the point on the course we wanted to start at while it was still dark. Signs were hard to read, as the reflective material was sometimes weathered to the point that the letters and numbers looked like something other than what they were. The air was below freezing, and in the light of the headlights, I could see the fields were covered in frost. Still, it looked like it would be a great day with clear skies and little wind.

We didn't get 25 miles into the recon before I found mud. I was pretty familiar with where we were going, and I asked Jeremy, "Hey, shouldn't we be coming up on that B Road soon?", and he answered immediately that we should be on it now. I looked up, a bit alarmed, and sure enough, the gravel was thinning out, and next thing we know, we're in it. I was a bit perplexed because I didn't see the typical warning sign. But the road looked okay, so we forged onward.

The roads that are unpaved can sometimes look okay, but I've been around on these long enough to know that because B Roads follow the land's contours, when the road goes downward, it usually isn't a good thing. Once again, my theories on B Roads were proven more correct. The road we were on went down, and of course, at the bottom was a mud hole. I punched the accelerator, Jeremy grabbed the "oh shit!" handles, and I plunged in.

The mud flew, the engine roared, and the ol' Tundra pulled through. Whew! That was close!

Oh yeah!

As if that wasn't enough, I drove Jeremy down another B Road later on. I didn't think this one would be as long as it was, but yeah.....it went down again! 

And it was a good thing we traveled in the direction that we did. The side we descended was slippery, very steep, and wet. Going up was drier, and just as steep, but there was traction.

I feathered the accelerator and gave it just enough goose to get the job done. Good thing the Tundra has a towing package, since I put that low end torque to the test on that climb!

Checkpoint Alpha was checked out, and I was pretty pleased with the layout. There is a small park we'll be using to do our deeds in and it has a shelter house, a Coke machine, and a permanently installed porta-jon. (I know. So ironic!) It'll be just perfect for what we'll be doing though.  Oh yeah....Checkpoint Alpha is 52 miles into the event, in case you were wondering. We left there and motored onward to check out some other stuff.

Winding climb

 The course is looking pretty good. It will be brutal in spots, but in others, (weather dependent), it will be nice riding with great views.

The gravel roads are in a state of repair after a long, very dry, and hot summer. This has caused the counties to lay down a lot of chunky, fresh gravel. Typical for what I have seen all late Summer and Fall so far here. Depending upon what Winter will bring, we may be looking at some chunky roads next spring again.

Right now I have 170 plus miles verified, documented, and waiting to be cue sheeted. The plan is to get out there and do the rest, (approximately 150 miles), in one fell swoop, which would conclude the recon for this course. Then it would go to cue sheet proofs, and those would be double checked in the spring again.

It looks as though I won't be needing to include a "Secret Checkpoint" either. Convenience stores will be spread throughout the course, and there will be more available on next year's course than last Spring's event had available.

Okay, so that's a wrap for this report. Hopefully I can get the rest knocked out soon, and we can focus on cue sheet production soon. Stay tuned.........

Trans Iowa V9: Course Recon Report #1

Sunday way before dawn I arose and collected Jeremy from his abode to hit the gravels and see what I had come up with for a course for the next Trans Iowa. Following is the story on the day, and some glimpses into what the course may hold in store for those intrepid T.I.V9 cyclists next April.

Somewhere in Iowa before dawn.

The plan was to drive a large loop that would start with parts of the course that would come later, then skip over a section of territory to the beginning of the course in Grinnell, and drive back on course to a point that was closest to home and return for the day. Jeremy was to be my note taker/navigator, and I was helping to look out for signage and ascertain how the course was going to be for difficulty, which will affect the time cut offs.

We got to the point on the course we wanted to start at while it was still dark. Signs were hard to read, as the reflective material was sometimes weathered to the point that the letters and numbers looked like something other than what they were. The air was below freezing, and in the light of the headlights, I could see the fields were covered in frost. Still, it looked like it would be a great day with clear skies and little wind.

We didn't get 25 miles into the recon before I found mud. I was pretty familiar with where we were going, and I asked Jeremy, "Hey, shouldn't we be coming up on that B Road soon?", and he answered immediately that we should be on it now. I looked up, a bit alarmed, and sure enough, the gravel was thinning out, and next thing we know, we're in it. I was a bit perplexed because I didn't see the typical warning sign. But the road looked okay, so we forged onward.

The roads that are unpaved can sometimes look okay, but I've been around on these long enough to know that because B Roads follow the land's contours, when the road goes downward, it usually isn't a good thing. Once again, my theories on B Roads were proven more correct. The road we were on went down, and of course, at the bottom was a mud hole. I punched the accelerator, Jeremy grabbed the "oh shit!" handles, and I plunged in.

The mud flew, the engine roared, and the ol' Tundra pulled through. Whew! That was close!

Oh yeah!

As if that wasn't enough, I drove Jeremy down another B Road later on. I didn't think this one would be as long as it was, but yeah.....it went down again! 

And it was a good thing we traveled in the direction that we did. The side we descended was slippery, very steep, and wet. Going up was drier, and just as steep, but there was traction.

I feathered the accelerator and gave it just enough goose to get the job done. Good thing the Tundra has a towing package, since I put that low end torque to the test on that climb!

Checkpoint Alpha was checked out, and I was pretty pleased with the layout. There is a small park we'll be using to do our deeds in and it has a shelter house, a Coke machine, and a permanently installed porta-jon. (I know. So ironic!) It'll be just perfect for what we'll be doing though.  Oh yeah....Checkpoint Alpha is 52 miles into the event, in case you were wondering. We left there and motored onward to check out some other stuff.

Winding climb

 The course is looking pretty good. It will be brutal in spots, but in others, (weather dependent), it will be nice riding with great views.

The gravel roads are in a state of repair after a long, very dry, and hot summer. This has caused the counties to lay down a lot of chunky, fresh gravel. Typical for what I have seen all late Summer and Fall so far here. Depending upon what Winter will bring, we may be looking at some chunky roads next spring again.

Right now I have 170 plus miles verified, documented, and waiting to be cue sheeted. The plan is to get out there and do the rest, (approximately 150 miles), in one fell swoop, which would conclude the recon for this course. Then it would go to cue sheet proofs, and those would be double checked in the spring again.

It looks as though I won't be needing to include a "Secret Checkpoint" either. Convenience stores will be spread throughout the course, and there will be more available on next year's course than last Spring's event had available.

Okay, so that's a wrap for this report. Hopefully I can get the rest knocked out soon, and we can focus on cue sheet production soon. Stay tuned.........

3GR: Chilly Willy

Ron  riding toward me at the ride start

Another month gone for the 3GR. This was the last ride in October. It was a chilly one too! Still, it could have been a lot worse. We actually had a nice day, considering the forecast.

I went to sleep Friday thinking it would be in the low 20's Fahrenheit when I awoke on Saturday. I was pleasantly surprised to find out it was 32° instead, with very light Northwest winds. I was prepared for the cold though.

I had laid out my layers the evening before, and I slipped on everything and was out the door well before 8:00am.  I arrived early to the start, and by 8:25am, I was thinking I would be the only nutcase riding in this chill. However; right at that moment, Robert rolled up, and as we were about to leave, Ron also joined us. So it was a threesome and we rolled on North down the bike path.

I have to say, that was a fun ride, but more than anything else, I think that easily beats the record for the most wide ranging, deep thinking conversation I've had on a bicycle ride for a long, long time.

On the flatter, Northward section.

The winds never did appear, and that was a good thing. What has appeared are the deer. The rut season is on, and we saw several deer, both bucks and does, in a lot of places we do not normally see deer.

We saw one buck in particular, a good sized one, running flat out along a fence line in wide open territory. That just doesn't happen unless it is rut season. Those bucks just lose all sense of self preservation at this point. Unfortunately, it also means many automobiles hit these deer, both bucks and the does, as they chase each other around for mating.

By later in the ride though, the deer had ceased to be an issue, since during the day the activity seems to settle down some. Besides some dogs, the countryside seemed devoid of wildlife or farm animals. Getting back to town, Robert and I decided to hit Cup Of Joe's, and we actually got to sit inside this time. I think that is a first, and a good thing, since it was just too chilly to sit outdoors that morning.

3GR will continue on a week by week basis now as we get into November. As long as the weather holds out, I'll keep on going out. If we get snow, or if the temperatures and winds get to be too cold, I'll cut it off for the year. We'll see just how far we can go. I figure most likely until Thanksgiving time, at the least.

Stay tuned....

3GR: Chilly Willy

Ron  riding toward me at the ride start

Another month gone for the 3GR. This was the last ride in October. It was a chilly one too! Still, it could have been a lot worse. We actually had a nice day, considering the forecast.

I went to sleep Friday thinking it would be in the low 20's Fahrenheit when I awoke on Saturday. I was pleasantly surprised to find out it was 32° instead, with very light Northwest winds. I was prepared for the cold though.

I had laid out my layers the evening before, and I slipped on everything and was out the door well before 8:00am.  I arrived early to the start, and by 8:25am, I was thinking I would be the only nutcase riding in this chill. However; right at that moment, Robert rolled up, and as we were about to leave, Ron also joined us. So it was a threesome and we rolled on North down the bike path.

I have to say, that was a fun ride, but more than anything else, I think that easily beats the record for the most wide ranging, deep thinking conversation I've had on a bicycle ride for a long, long time.

On the flatter, Northward section.

The winds never did appear, and that was a good thing. What has appeared are the deer. The rut season is on, and we saw several deer, both bucks and does, in a lot of places we do not normally see deer.

We saw one buck in particular, a good sized one, running flat out along a fence line in wide open territory. That just doesn't happen unless it is rut season. Those bucks just lose all sense of self preservation at this point. Unfortunately, it also means many automobiles hit these deer, both bucks and the does, as they chase each other around for mating.

By later in the ride though, the deer had ceased to be an issue, since during the day the activity seems to settle down some. Besides some dogs, the countryside seemed devoid of wildlife or farm animals. Getting back to town, Robert and I decided to hit Cup Of Joe's, and we actually got to sit inside this time. I think that is a first, and a good thing, since it was just too chilly to sit outdoors that morning.

3GR will continue on a week by week basis now as we get into November. As long as the weather holds out, I'll keep on going out. If we get snow, or if the temperatures and winds get to be too cold, I'll cut it off for the year. We'll see just how far we can go. I figure most likely until Thanksgiving time, at the least.

Stay tuned....

Trans Iowa V9: Working On The Route

Trans Iowa V9 registration will kick off in a little over a week's time now, but that isn't all that's been going on behind the scenes with this event.

I've spent a fair amount of time going cross-eyed over maps lately. Doing calculations, adding miles, and looking for interesting things to ride by. Now all of the investigation will be focused "in the field", as it were, as I and a cohort hit the back roads of Iowa in search of the route I have envisioned for Trans Iowa V9.

The plan is to start in Grinnell and then to drive the route to Checkpoint Alpha. From there the route will be traced to Checkpoint Bravo. By this time, I figure the day will be mostly shot. Doing 170+ miles of recon in one fell swoop is pretty time consuming. (And that doesn't count the mileage driving to get to the start and back from where recon ends.)

You see, you just don't drive pellmell down the road, making sure it is there, and get it over with. No- you have to look for signs, make notes on concerns like rickety old bridges, bad B Roads, or low water crossings. B Roads sometimes have to be walked, since cars may not be able to traverse them at the time they are checked over. Convenience stores have to be walked in to and looked over to see if they will have proper eats and drinks available. It's a lot of detail work, and it just takes a long time to get it right.

That said, I find it to be fun to do, (yet), so I don't mind. This year I have a partner in crime that is volunteering to help, so the work load will be a bit easier. It should be a good time. Look for a full Recon Report soon.....

Trans Iowa V9: Working On The Route

Trans Iowa V9 registration will kick off in a little over a week's time now, but that isn't all that's been going on behind the scenes with this event.

I've spent a fair amount of time going cross-eyed over maps lately. Doing calculations, adding miles, and looking for interesting things to ride by. Now all of the investigation will be focused "in the field", as it were, as I and a cohort hit the back roads of Iowa in search of the route I have envisioned for Trans Iowa V9.

The plan is to start in Grinnell and then to drive the route to Checkpoint Alpha. From there the route will be traced to Checkpoint Bravo. By this time, I figure the day will be mostly shot. Doing 170+ miles of recon in one fell swoop is pretty time consuming. (And that doesn't count the mileage driving to get to the start and back from where recon ends.)

You see, you just don't drive pellmell down the road, making sure it is there, and get it over with. No- you have to look for signs, make notes on concerns like rickety old bridges, bad B Roads, or low water crossings. B Roads sometimes have to be walked, since cars may not be able to traverse them at the time they are checked over. Convenience stores have to be walked in to and looked over to see if they will have proper eats and drinks available. It's a lot of detail work, and it just takes a long time to get it right.

That said, I find it to be fun to do, (yet), so I don't mind. This year I have a partner in crime that is volunteering to help, so the work load will be a bit easier. It should be a good time. Look for a full Recon Report soon.....

Friday News And Views

And the answer is.....

Canti Or Disc? 

This week I posted up on the question of whether "gravel bikes" should or should not have disc brakes. You can catch that post here if you missed it the first time. 

That post has garnered a lot of hits here on the site, so I figured a bit of follow up was in order here. The first result was seen in the comments section for that post where it seems that the majority voted for "no disc brakes" on their gravel bikes.

The other thing to note here is that this may or may not be a reflection of what cyclo cross bikes should have. However; here is something to chew on regarding both cyclo cross and gravel road going rigs. Until someone, (and my guess is that "someone" will end up being SRAM first), comes up with a reasonable hydraulically actuated brake in a drop bar specific brake/shift lever similar to what is in use now, the disc brake thing on drop bar bikes will be mostly a sideshow. This does not include "converter boxes", which are a kludge and add extra weight and costs. No- the lever will necessarily have to be self contained, or it will be a no-go.

And there are other details to mull over here as well. rotor size, rear spacing, (which looks to be going to 135OD), weight, and other details that would need to get sorted before the disc brake thing for these bikes would make more sense.You know- it reminds me of the disc vs canti mountain bike days of the late 90's/early 00's. Except this is with skinnier tires, which by the way, is something else that will affect the outcome greatly here as well.

This year's model.

Project Black was the other big draw this week. The post where I listed the spec and all of the images were heavily checked out here. Curious that.

I mean, I post a lot of bike's images here, and a few of them I'll post full spec on, but the Vassago Jabberwocky has brought more attention than any of the previous rigs save maybe the Fargo, my BMC Orange Crush, and the OS Bikes Blackbuck.

I can see why the mentioned trio of bikes gets interest. The Fargo- because it is a drop bar mountain bike/adventure rig. The Blackbuck because of the swoopy stays and rarity. The BMC Orange Crush- again for the rarity and the "monster-cross" and gravel bike possibilities perhaps. But the Vassago?

Someone help me out here and tell me what it is that is so fascinating about this steel hard tail. I am flattered that it draws so many hits, but frankly, I don't get it. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with the Jabberwocky, but I don't see anything inherently unique about it either, besides the marketing hype behind the "Wet Cat" geometry, which is not that big a deal, really.

Ride Free.

Pro Road Cycling is in a mess right now. Most of you are aware of what has been going on. Without delving into the details, I wanted to point up something I thought was kind of a stroke of genius, (and is close to my heart), with regard to maybe getting this situation righted.

Greg Lemond wrote a missive on his Facebook page yesterday which was quickly circulated around the Internet. You can read it, and the back ground of the issues here.

Leaving much of that behind, what I want to focus on is what Mr. Lemond wrote near to the end of his rant. I quote him here:

"If people really want to clean the sport of cycling up all you have to do is put your money where your mouth is.
Don't buy a USA Cycling license. Give up racing for a year, just long enough to put the UCI and USA cycling out of business. We can then start from scratch and let the real lovers in cycling direct where and how the sport of cycling will go."

First off, I wouldn't say that you should "give up racing for a year", because you don't have to. I do agree with the rest of this, which I think is brilliant if riders would do this en masse. Do I think this will happen? No. But it should. 

And if it does, there are a ton of "underground" events waiting for the racers. And hey- why not start up your own racing leagues. They did it in Wisconsin with a mountain bike series that flourished for years. So....it can be done. It should be done. 

The UCI is tainted, if not downright corrupt and they- in my humble opinion- had to know what the heck was going on with regard to doping in the peloton. I like what Team Sky is doing- rooting out all past and present dopers. (They sacked Bobby Julich just the other day.) The UCI should do something similar with regard to those who turned their heads to look the other way, or were complicit in some way with what went on in road cycling. Clean house. Do it now. Lance Armstrong isn't the problem. He's just the highest profile rider involved. Caught up in something that the UCI was responsible to stop, to prevent, and to police more vigilantly. They failed. They should accept responsibility and do the right thing.

That's my take. Nuff said.... 

3GR: Yep! It is getting colder. Yep! It is darker in the AM. Big deal. 3GR is still going to happen, so if you want to ride, show up at Gateway Park, 8:30am, and we'll ride the route. Thanks to all you who gave it a shot and I hope more of you will try it out. We're having fun- you could be too. 

And that's a wrap. Ride a bicycle this weekend. Take care! 

Friday News And Views

And the answer is.....

Canti Or Disc? 

This week I posted up on the question of whether "gravel bikes" should or should not have disc brakes. You can catch that post here if you missed it the first time. 

That post has garnered a lot of hits here on the site, so I figured a bit of follow up was in order here. The first result was seen in the comments section for that post where it seems that the majority voted for "no disc brakes" on their gravel bikes.

The other thing to note here is that this may or may not be a reflection of what cyclo cross bikes should have. However; here is something to chew on regarding both cyclo cross and gravel road going rigs. Until someone, (and my guess is that "someone" will end up being SRAM first), comes up with a reasonable hydraulically actuated brake in a drop bar specific brake/shift lever similar to what is in use now, the disc brake thing on drop bar bikes will be mostly a sideshow. This does not include "converter boxes", which are a kludge and add extra weight and costs. No- the lever will necessarily have to be self contained, or it will be a no-go.

And there are other details to mull over here as well. rotor size, rear spacing, (which looks to be going to 135OD), weight, and other details that would need to get sorted before the disc brake thing for these bikes would make more sense.You know- it reminds me of the disc vs canti mountain bike days of the late 90's/early 00's. Except this is with skinnier tires, which by the way, is something else that will affect the outcome greatly here as well.

This year's model.

Project Black was the other big draw this week. The post where I listed the spec and all of the images were heavily checked out here. Curious that.

I mean, I post a lot of bike's images here, and a few of them I'll post full spec on, but the Vassago Jabberwocky has brought more attention than any of the previous rigs save maybe the Fargo, my BMC Orange Crush, and the OS Bikes Blackbuck.

I can see why the mentioned trio of bikes gets interest. The Fargo- because it is a drop bar mountain bike/adventure rig. The Blackbuck because of the swoopy stays and rarity. The BMC Orange Crush- again for the rarity and the "monster-cross" and gravel bike possibilities perhaps. But the Vassago?

Someone help me out here and tell me what it is that is so fascinating about this steel hard tail. I am flattered that it draws so many hits, but frankly, I don't get it. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with the Jabberwocky, but I don't see anything inherently unique about it either, besides the marketing hype behind the "Wet Cat" geometry, which is not that big a deal, really.

Ride Free.

Pro Road Cycling is in a mess right now. Most of you are aware of what has been going on. Without delving into the details, I wanted to point up something I thought was kind of a stroke of genius, (and is close to my heart), with regard to maybe getting this situation righted.

Greg Lemond wrote a missive on his Facebook page yesterday which was quickly circulated around the Internet. You can read it, and the back ground of the issues here.

Leaving much of that behind, what I want to focus on is what Mr. Lemond wrote near to the end of his rant. I quote him here:

"If people really want to clean the sport of cycling up all you have to do is put your money where your mouth is.
Don't buy a USA Cycling license. Give up racing for a year, just long enough to put the UCI and USA cycling out of business. We can then start from scratch and let the real lovers in cycling direct where and how the sport of cycling will go."

First off, I wouldn't say that you should "give up racing for a year", because you don't have to. I do agree with the rest of this, which I think is brilliant if riders would do this en masse. Do I think this will happen? No. But it should. 

And if it does, there are a ton of "underground" events waiting for the racers. And hey- why not start up your own racing leagues. They did it in Wisconsin with a mountain bike series that flourished for years. So....it can be done. It should be done. 

The UCI is tainted, if not downright corrupt and they- in my humble opinion- had to know what the heck was going on with regard to doping in the peloton. I like what Team Sky is doing- rooting out all past and present dopers. (They sacked Bobby Julich just the other day.) The UCI should do something similar with regard to those who turned their heads to look the other way, or were complicit in some way with what went on in road cycling. Clean house. Do it now. Lance Armstrong isn't the problem. He's just the highest profile rider involved. Caught up in something that the UCI was responsible to stop, to prevent, and to police more vigilantly. They failed. They should accept responsibility and do the right thing.

That's my take. Nuff said.... 

3GR: Yep! It is getting colder. Yep! It is darker in the AM. Big deal. 3GR is still going to happen, so if you want to ride, show up at Gateway Park, 8:30am, and we'll ride the route. Thanks to all you who gave it a shot and I hope more of you will try it out. We're having fun- you could be too. 

And that's a wrap. Ride a bicycle this weekend. Take care! 

The Nitty-Gritty Wham-Bam

Project Black: In The Wild

Or: Dancing With Project Black

Wednesday. The day off from the shop job.  Usually I go out and at least grab a quick test ride on whatever it is I am doing for TNI.com. This time I was doing that, but it also was the maiden voyage off road for the Project Black Vassago. You can check out the particulars on that rig here.

I decided to go out to The Camp yesterday. I figured the landscape would be right for the Geax Gato tires I was sporting on the bicycle. With several days of moisture around here, I figured the dirt would be softened up quite a bit, and I was right about that part. Even the deer tracks were post-holed and skid marks from their running, stopping, and changing directions were everywhere in evidence.

The thing I hadn't considered was that almost all the leaves that used to be on trees were now all over the trails. This made for a surface that was like grease underneath a layer of slippery sheaves of paper that would slide and shift if you pushed your luck too far. Treacherous to be sure, but even more so when one considers the rocks and roots that lay hidden underneath the multicolored blanket of foliage.

Like a mung covered tooth in blackened gums.

Project Black had one round trip on it to work and back to ferret out any niggling issues it may have. I tweaked the seat angle, checked all the bolts, and aligned the brake calipers, but it was pretty much spot on. With that I figured the only thing holding me back would be the unknown of the tires and the brakes needing bedding in.

Oh yeah, and that rear cog? It was ridiculously low geared for a commute, so I looked at it finally. A 22T!! What the....!! I didn't know I'd ever used a 22T before, but there it was, big as life. Oh well....

I was at the Camp and I was going to ride that Vassago no matter. It was a strange riding bike. On one hand, it is nice and smooth, even without considering the long seat post, because it felt great out of the saddle also. The Salsa fork is perfectly matched to this frame. The steering being not heavy, or quirky in any way. So, on top of it, the Vassago seems like a very nice frame.

But underneath it all, the "Wet Cat" geometry is sort of......well, it is boring, actually. The bike is so stable and refined feeling that nothing seems to upset you while you are riding it. Nothing stands out. Cornering is neutral to the point of being ho-hum. Climbing traction is great to the point that you shouldn't ever have to worry about it, (from the bike's standpoint. Now your legs are another matter.) Slow speed technical handling is so easy it is crazy. Only the tires let me down yesterday.

Untangling myself after the carnage.

Literally- they let me down right in the little technical rock garden after climbing out of the Lower section of trails. The slippery rocks beneath the leaves got me, and wham-bam! There I was sitting on my arse, legs tangled in the frame.

As I sat there assessing my situation, I noticed a small troupe of deer had come up from behind the hillock to my backside. They hadn't even noticed me, but suddenly they did and everyone, including myself, froze. I watched as the deer tried to ascertain my intentions, while I made some unusual sounds to confuse them for my entertainment. The deer responded by being confused as to what I was, and how to react to me. They eventually, cautiously, tip-toed away, giving pause to look back to see if I was moving every so often. Then they were gone. I love being entertained by deer. But now it was time to ride on.

Hmm.....let's see. A couple of small puncture wounds on the right knee, but nothing to fret over. I stood up and re-mounted the Jabberwocky. Its stable ride begged me to take right off again with no concern for what had just happened. Like a dance partner that knows the steps and you just follow their lead, the Vassago was a very easy to trust steed. Back in the day, there were cars called "business coupes". The Jabberwocky is like a business coupe. It works efficiently, with no drama, but it is "plain jane" while doing so. Almost boring, like a stripped down, workman-like business coupe of the early 50's. But you know it will get the job done every time.

Leaves obscuring the trail.

That low gear actually worked out to my advantage as well. It kept me from speeding too quickly and missing the clues as to where the trail actually was at. The trails were almost obliterated by those downed leaves and I had to keep a sharp eye out for where they were pressed down by other cyclists to reveal where the path lay.

Climbing was so easy, I stayed seated the entire ride, with the exception of coasting. The Jabberwocky just hooked up and went on up, no matter the pitch.

The Geax tires were pitching dirt around me like an old time manure spreader. It was humorous to see clods of dirt fly up and then disappear as I rode along. The gritty dirt was sticking to my shins, and the area near the end of the loop was drier, tackier, and more fun.

So the end of the ride was a bit more fun without the sketchy off camber and unseen roots and rocks knocking the bike off-line. By the time I looped back to the truck again, I had decided the Jabberwocky- although not very exciting- was going to stick around for awhile.

The Nitty-Gritty Wham-Bam

Project Black: In The Wild

Or: Dancing With Project Black

Wednesday. The day off from the shop job.  Usually I go out and at least grab a quick test ride on whatever it is I am doing for TNI.com. This time I was doing that, but it also was the maiden voyage off road for the Project Black Vassago. You can check out the particulars on that rig here.

I decided to go out to The Camp yesterday. I figured the landscape would be right for the Geax Gato tires I was sporting on the bicycle. With several days of moisture around here, I figured the dirt would be softened up quite a bit, and I was right about that part. Even the deer tracks were post-holed and skid marks from their running, stopping, and changing directions were everywhere in evidence.

The thing I hadn't considered was that almost all the leaves that used to be on trees were now all over the trails. This made for a surface that was like grease underneath a layer of slippery sheaves of paper that would slide and shift if you pushed your luck too far. Treacherous to be sure, but even more so when one considers the rocks and roots that lay hidden underneath the multicolored blanket of foliage.

Like a mung covered tooth in blackened gums.

Project Black had one round trip on it to work and back to ferret out any niggling issues it may have. I tweaked the seat angle, checked all the bolts, and aligned the brake calipers, but it was pretty much spot on. With that I figured the only thing holding me back would be the unknown of the tires and the brakes needing bedding in.

Oh yeah, and that rear cog? It was ridiculously low geared for a commute, so I looked at it finally. A 22T!! What the....!! I didn't know I'd ever used a 22T before, but there it was, big as life. Oh well....

I was at the Camp and I was going to ride that Vassago no matter. It was a strange riding bike. On one hand, it is nice and smooth, even without considering the long seat post, because it felt great out of the saddle also. The Salsa fork is perfectly matched to this frame. The steering being not heavy, or quirky in any way. So, on top of it, the Vassago seems like a very nice frame.

But underneath it all, the "Wet Cat" geometry is sort of......well, it is boring, actually. The bike is so stable and refined feeling that nothing seems to upset you while you are riding it. Nothing stands out. Cornering is neutral to the point of being ho-hum. Climbing traction is great to the point that you shouldn't ever have to worry about it, (from the bike's standpoint. Now your legs are another matter.) Slow speed technical handling is so easy it is crazy. Only the tires let me down yesterday.

Untangling myself after the carnage.

Literally- they let me down right in the little technical rock garden after climbing out of the Lower section of trails. The slippery rocks beneath the leaves got me, and wham-bam! There I was sitting on my arse, legs tangled in the frame.

As I sat there assessing my situation, I noticed a small troupe of deer had come up from behind the hillock to my backside. They hadn't even noticed me, but suddenly they did and everyone, including myself, froze. I watched as the deer tried to ascertain my intentions, while I made some unusual sounds to confuse them for my entertainment. The deer responded by being confused as to what I was, and how to react to me. They eventually, cautiously, tip-toed away, giving pause to look back to see if I was moving every so often. Then they were gone. I love being entertained by deer. But now it was time to ride on.

Hmm.....let's see. A couple of small puncture wounds on the right knee, but nothing to fret over. I stood up and re-mounted the Jabberwocky. Its stable ride begged me to take right off again with no concern for what had just happened. Like a dance partner that knows the steps and you just follow their lead, the Vassago was a very easy to trust steed. Back in the day, there were cars called "business coupes". The Jabberwocky is like a business coupe. It works efficiently, with no drama, but it is "plain jane" while doing so. Almost boring, like a stripped down, workman-like business coupe of the early 50's. But you know it will get the job done every time.

Leaves obscuring the trail.

That low gear actually worked out to my advantage as well. It kept me from speeding too quickly and missing the clues as to where the trail actually was at. The trails were almost obliterated by those downed leaves and I had to keep a sharp eye out for where they were pressed down by other cyclists to reveal where the path lay.

Climbing was so easy, I stayed seated the entire ride, with the exception of coasting. The Jabberwocky just hooked up and went on up, no matter the pitch.

The Geax tires were pitching dirt around me like an old time manure spreader. It was humorous to see clods of dirt fly up and then disappear as I rode along. The gritty dirt was sticking to my shins, and the area near the end of the loop was drier, tackier, and more fun.

So the end of the ride was a bit more fun without the sketchy off camber and unseen roots and rocks knocking the bike off-line. By the time I looped back to the truck again, I had decided the Jabberwocky- although not very exciting- was going to stick around for awhile.

29"er Geometry: Tuning Forks

Just over a year ago I posted this missive on 29"er Geometry. In that post I went back over where 29"er geometry had been, where it was, and where it looked to be going. My final conclusion then , (and still is), was that there is "No School" geometry these days for 29"ers. There just isn't a coalescing of thought on what the numbers should be like for 29"ers  today like there was 25 years ago with 26"er hard tail mountain bikes.

I've had several forks on this bike...

So, what we have today is the ability to change the front end geometry, and thus- the over-all handling characteristics of our 29"ers. This is an intimidating thought for a lot of mountain bikers out there. The geometry terms and how they work are confusing to many, and downright misunderstood by several folks.

But it doesn't have to be this way.

First things first- The Human species is a highly adaptable one, and the power of our brains to quickly learn and master new inputs and tasks is not to be underestimated. A rider can ride many variations of geometry successfully on many different types of terrain. The thing is, you have to "want to", and that may be influenced by preferences and perceptions to a high degree.

So take that all into mind while reading this post. Nothing I put forth here is going to reveal "the perfect geometry for 29"ers", nor should it. That said, I hope there is something you can draw from this to make your own considered judgments on what might be "right:" for your 29"er. This post will strive to show how you could "tune" your handling with simple fork swaps.

This is something I have done over the years with one of my bikes in particular: the OS Bikes Blackbuck 29"er single speed hard tail.

....like this rigid Willits W.O.W. fork.

In 2008 I ran eight different forks with axle to crown measurements from 420mm to 510mm and offsets from 38mm to 51mm all on this one bike to gauge the effects of what front end geometry did to handling.

Head angle, bottom bracket height, and seat tube angle all changed with each fork, and I carefully measured each change to make sure I adjusted my cockpit to be as close to the same with each fork that I could. Then I tested each set up on various trails in the local area.

I posted my findings which maybe shocked some, and puzzled others. Basically what I said to start out here is the conclusion, but here are a few details for you to consider here. The terminology has to be understood first and foremost.

• "Quicker handling" is basically steering that is less stable. The extreme of this would be a bike one has to really concentrate on to keep on trail, or you crash. Most folks want "quicker" to equal "easier to steer", but that can get confused with "stability", so be careful!
• "Slower handling" is- you guessed it- more stable geometry. Essentially a bike that is so easy to ride, you can track stand it easily, and/or ride no handed over rough ground without the bike bouncing off line. Geometry can play into this, but so can wheel weight, rider weight distribution, and even tire pressures. "Slow" handling bikes tend to also be a chore to corner in tighter trails or switchbacks.
• "Trail" is a result of a formula that takes into account the head angle, fork offset, and wheel diameter of a bicycle. A higher figure, (which is usually expressed in millimeters for bicycles), will indicate a front end geometry that is more stable, (slower), and a lower figure for trail would indicate the opposite, (quicker handling). You may have heard some folks in the rando world that will talk about "low trail forks" for better front end loading capabilities, and this is what they are referring to.  Mountain bikes tend to have higher trail figures for stability, and front end loads are not a concern here. 
• "Axle to Crown" is a measurement from the center line of your front wheel axle to the base of the crown race on the fork. It is useful for adjusting the head angle of your frame without modifying the frame. For instance, you could use a fork on your 29"er that had anywhere from 420mm axle to crown to over 500mm and effect head angle changes of up to 3°-4°, which has a big effect on your Trail figure.
• "Offset", or more correctly "Fork Offset", (which some refer to as "rake", which I liken to a gardening tool, but whatever...), is the distance the front axle is "offset" forward from the center line drawn through your steer tube to the ground. Where the axle is forward of this axis is measured as offset, but more here equals less. Yes- your front axle looks as if it is in front of your steer tube, but trust me- where the rubber meets the trail, that contact point is behind the center line of your steer tube if you draw a line straight down from the axle to the ground and compare the two points.  More offset = less stable Trail figures. So, if you push the axle further away from the steer tube center line, the tire contact point will get closer to the intersection of the steer tube axis with the ground equaling less Trail. (Of course, head angle and wheel diameter may negate this or enhance it.) Having a hard time visualizing this? Think of a shopping cart wheel. The axis where it pivots is your steer tube, the wheel's contact patch is behind that. Now tilt the axis, which is normally vertical, to be more like a bicycle head angle. See it now?

Okay- that's enough for one post. In the meantime, go knock yerself out playing with this Bicycle Trail Calculator . I'll come back again with another edition of "29"er Geometry: Tuning Forks" soon.

29"er Geometry: Tuning Forks

Just over a year ago I posted this missive on 29"er Geometry. In that post I went back over where 29"er geometry had been, where it was, and where it looked to be going. My final conclusion then , (and still is), was that there is "No School" geometry these days for 29"ers. There just isn't a coalescing of thought on what the numbers should be like for 29"ers  today like there was 25 years ago with 26"er hard tail mountain bikes.

I've had several forks on this bike...

So, what we have today is the ability to change the front end geometry, and thus- the over-all handling characteristics of our 29"ers. This is an intimidating thought for a lot of mountain bikers out there. The geometry terms and how they work are confusing to many, and downright misunderstood by several folks.

But it doesn't have to be this way.

First things first- The Human species is a highly adaptable one, and the power of our brains to quickly learn and master new inputs and tasks is not to be underestimated. A rider can ride many variations of geometry successfully on many different types of terrain. The thing is, you have to "want to", and that may be influenced by preferences and perceptions to a high degree.

So take that all into mind while reading this post. Nothing I put forth here is going to reveal "the perfect geometry for 29"ers", nor should it. That said, I hope there is something you can draw from this to make your own considered judgments on what might be "right:" for your 29"er. This post will strive to show how you could "tune" your handling with simple fork swaps.

This is something I have done over the years with one of my bikes in particular: the OS Bikes Blackbuck 29"er single speed hard tail.

....like this rigid Willits W.O.W. fork.

In 2008 I ran eight different forks with axle to crown measurements from 420mm to 510mm and offsets from 38mm to 51mm all on this one bike to gauge the effects of what front end geometry did to handling.

Head angle, bottom bracket height, and seat tube angle all changed with each fork, and I carefully measured each change to make sure I adjusted my cockpit to be as close to the same with each fork that I could. Then I tested each set up on various trails in the local area.

I posted my findings which maybe shocked some, and puzzled others. Basically what I said to start out here is the conclusion, but here are a few details for you to consider here. The terminology has to be understood first and foremost.

• "Quicker handling" is basically steering that is less stable. The extreme of this would be a bike one has to really concentrate on to keep on trail, or you crash. Most folks want "quicker" to equal "easier to steer", but that can get confused with "stability", so be careful!
• "Slower handling" is- you guessed it- more stable geometry. Essentially a bike that is so easy to ride, you can track stand it easily, and/or ride no handed over rough ground without the bike bouncing off line. Geometry can play into this, but so can wheel weight, rider weight distribution, and even tire pressures. "Slow" handling bikes tend to also be a chore to corner in tighter trails or switchbacks.
• "Trail" is a result of a formula that takes into account the head angle, fork offset, and wheel diameter of a bicycle. A higher figure, (which is usually expressed in millimeters for bicycles), will indicate a front end geometry that is more stable, (slower), and a lower figure for trail would indicate the opposite, (quicker handling). You may have heard some folks in the rando world that will talk about "low trail forks" for better front end loading capabilities, and this is what they are referring to.  Mountain bikes tend to have higher trail figures for stability, and front end loads are not a concern here. 
• "Axle to Crown" is a measurement from the center line of your front wheel axle to the base of the crown race on the fork. It is useful for adjusting the head angle of your frame without modifying the frame. For instance, you could use a fork on your 29"er that had anywhere from 420mm axle to crown to over 500mm and effect head angle changes of up to 3°-4°, which has a big effect on your Trail figure.
• "Offset", or more correctly "Fork Offset", (which some refer to as "rake", which I liken to a gardening tool, but whatever...), is the distance the front axle is "offset" forward from the center line drawn through your steer tube to the ground. Where the axle is forward of this axis is measured as offset, but more here equals less. Yes- your front axle looks as if it is in front of your steer tube, but trust me- where the rubber meets the trail, that contact point is behind the center line of your steer tube if you draw a line straight down from the axle to the ground and compare the two points.  More offset = less stable Trail figures. So, if you push the axle further away from the steer tube center line, the tire contact point will get closer to the intersection of the steer tube axis with the ground equaling less Trail. (Of course, head angle and wheel diameter may negate this or enhance it.) Having a hard time visualizing this? Think of a shopping cart wheel. The axis where it pivots is your steer tube, the wheel's contact patch is behind that. Now tilt the axis, which is normally vertical, to be more like a bicycle head angle. See it now?

Okay- that's enough for one post. In the meantime, go knock yerself out playing with this Bicycle Trail Calculator . I'll come back again with another edition of "29"er Geometry: Tuning Forks" soon.

Gravel Bikes: Canti Or Disc?

Ahh...they seem to work just fine, but...

Gravel Bikes- (well, assuming you even agree that there is such a thing), usually have cantilever brakes these days. However; that is maybe more out of convenience/necessity than choice. Cyclo cross bikes, for the most part, are cantilever braked bikes, and those bikes tend to dominate the gravel bike riding scene.

But there is a big push for disc brakes in cyclo cross circles these days. (Notice- I didn't say just who was pushing for this.) So bikes like my Orange Crush BMC are sort of getting looked down upon. (See this post by BMC owner, Mike Varley on this subject.) However; for gravel races and riding, the disc brake is not a "slam dunk" idea. I want to give my thoughts on the matter here and maybe gauge your reactions in the comments to see just where everyone's minds are with regard to this.

The argument for disc brakes is that they work better...... There are different ways folks will end that statement, but it always goes back to "they work better" than cantilever brakes. Okay, you might believe that, and say you know that to be "true", but I know a handful of guys that would tell you a different story. The story of T.I.V6 where several riders burned through their disc brake pads within 50 miles of the start and their cantilever braked counterparts rode onward. So, in bad weather, disc brakes are not necessarily the cure. In fact, they could be a disadvantage. 

Disc or canti? On gravel?

 There is also the concern for control. On gravel, that may mean having brakes that are not necessarily the most powerful brakes. As anyone knows, a wheel that is skidding is a wheel that is out of control, and on the ball bearing-like surface of most gravel roads around here, you want to be very, very careful when using your brakes on high speed descents or in corners. It is super easy to skid on gravel, and losing control could mean that you may pay a big price in skin and machinery out there in the countryside.

This doesn't mean that you can not, or should not use disc brakes. Heck- I use disc brakes on my Fargo on gravel all the time. However; I don't need disc brakes for gravel riding. At least, I can not point to one instance where I thought having disc brakes on my gravel ride was an advantage over cantilevers. (I am assuming a well set up pair of cantilever brakes here, which is a whole 'nuther subject. Not too many folks are good at setting up canti brakes, and you gotta have that skill here.)

Finally, I have to wonder what one will sacrifice in ride quality with a frame and fork set up properly for disc brakes. Looking at what is being offered up for cyclo cross bikes with disc brakes, I am seeing a beefed up construction, that maybe is heavier, or not, but more importantly, needs to be stiffer. This is especially true with the fork design, since the forces at work on the fork are entirely different than with a cantilever equipped fork. Maybe I am wrong here, but I can't see how one can get a disc brake fork on a gravel bike that is reasonably light without sacrificing ride quality.

Maybe looking at things backward would help with my viewpoint. Say disc brake road/cyclo cross bikes came first. Then some guy invented a cantilever braked gravel road bike. It was lighter, had a more compliant fork for better ride quality, and sacrificed little to braking performance on off-pavement riding. What would you rather ride?

I know disc brakes are coming, and disc brakes "work", but at what cost? Hmm......and then maybe I'll be proven wrong, and some designer genius will get disc brakes on there and have greater rider comfort than my BMC bike. Maybe. I'm skeptical, but I'm not against disc brakes if they don't "harsh my ride". What say you? Hit up the comments and let's hear what you think out there.