Well, N.Y. Roll's "Hall of Fame Ride" takes place out of Vinton, Iowa this Sunday at 9:00am. (Details on his blog here)
I do not have any clear idea on who might show up, or how many people will show up. It is Father's Day, a Sunday, and that will limit the participation. There is also a local gravel ride happening the day before as well.
So, it could be a big group, or it could be just myself and N.Y. Roll- maybe a few others. No problem. As N.Y. Roll himself said- "This doesn't mean that this has to be the only ride for GT." I mean, I'm open to offers to do some other ride to celebrate this, so let me know if it matters to you.
And if it doesn't register on your radar to do anything like that, I'm good. I'm just saying that if you feel so inclined, let me know. It isn't as if N.Y. Roll's ride is it, and there will not be another chance to ride with me and celebrate this honor with me. But here's the thing- I'm not organizing a ride to celebrate this. That's got to come from someone else, for example, as with N.Y, Roll. So, don't wait for me to announce something I'm organizing, because that ain't-a-gonna happen. Hope that makes sense.
Well, since last October the ol' Riding Gravel Radio Ranch microphones have been gathering dust, that is until recently. There were some good reasons for that, but I will not delve into all the nitty-gritty of that here.
Suffice it to say that with the acquisition of some equipment on my part and with the help of N.Y. Roll, I have resurrected the podcast and a new episode is up now.
N.Y. Roll is my new co-host and we will be picking up where we left off with gab about gravel, bikepacking, and by interviewing subjects from the field of gravel grinding. I will intersperse this with some comments and thoughts on review items as well.
The RGRR podcast has been missed by more than a few folks and I was even asked while at the Gravel Cycling Hall of Fame induction after-party when I was ever going to get that podcast going again. Well, here ya go....
And if you wish I'd just go away, well then, don't hit the link.
Good news! Supply chain issues show signs of relaxing. Bad news: Gas prices are up and inflation is at record levels. Looks like the stock market tanked as well. Hrrumph!
Pandemic levels of demand and all those new cyclists? Poof! Gone.... The future looks a bit bleaker now, and even if the supply chain straightens out 100%, it is doubtful that boom times are going to continue when bikes do hit shop floors en-force.
Gas pricing may be seen as a good thing, but I don't think we are quite at the levels where people are willing to jump ship to cycling from cars just yet. They will drive less, and recreational activities are generally hurt by this first. A news article I read stated that National Park attendance has fallen off a cliff during 2022 so far compared to its record levels set the past two years.
Actually, I think what is happening is that a two-headed monster is affecting folks that might be cyclists from becoming cyclists- Gas prices aren't high enough to force folks out of cars and bike shop bicycle prices have jumped up, making a bicycle harder to acquire in a financial sense. I just helped a couple young folks at the Bicycle Collective who stated this to me. They want to cycle, but the cost of buying new bikes was out of their budget. I cannot imagine that this isn't happening more often than we know.
And since inflation has struck the prices of bikes and gear pretty hard, I think this will be a big reason for flat sales in 2022.. I think sales will be hurt especially in the lower end in the near term. Especially when I am hearing people complaining about what big-box stores are charging for bicycles. You know if they are upset about that, well a bike shop hasn't got a chance at their business.
In the world of cycling, there is a maxim, accredited to Keith Bontrager, that goes something like: "Strong, Cheap, Light. Pick Two". I'm going to paraphrase that and say "If you weigh North of 250lbs, You Only Get "Strong and Cheap, but it could be Expensive too!"
Okay, I'm being a bit harsh, because there are a lot of components and bicycles that have high weight limits or none at all. But in the case of seat posts, and carbon seat posts at that, one should pay close attention to weight limits.
I've broken two carbon seat posts in my life, and I have never broken a metal one. I'm pretty sure I've never even bent a metal one, but let's say I have for argument's sake. I'd rather bend a post, rendering it no good, than break a carbon post any day. I was fortunate both times not to incur an injury.
So, when I received an Ergon CF Allroad Pro carbon post to review for RidingGravel.com, I was thrilled to try it out, that is until I saw the 240lb weight limit. I'm juuust over that weight these days, but I am not taking any chances. I sent it off to get reviewed by the much lighter Grannygear.
And- so what? Well, this is another area where I feel that cycling kind of gets it wrong. Maybe the marketing message should be amended to show that this is for a very small percentage of folks who ride. Racers. Lightweight folks. Or......maybe design for heavier people and those who carry stuff on their backs. I get it- Ergon has been working on this post since around 2006. Just getting something out of all that R&D is pretty important, because I cannot believe this product is making any money for Ergon yet. And yes- maybe they are doing a version for heavier people in the future.
But for now? No seat post for you!
Note: It has been brought to my attention in the comments that lighter/smaller riders also face similar issues, but in the sense that most products are over-built for them. (Or do not fit, etc.) So, I apologize for not seeing that when I worked on this story about the Ergon post.
That's it for this week. Have a fantastic weekend!
2 comments:
I assume it's cost prohibitive from the production point of view, but what I'd really love to see is components specifically built for heavier and lighter riders, in the same way we get frames for taller and shorter riders. I weigh 140lbs., am not terribly strong, and presume that there's stuff on my bike that's way overbuilt (and hence heavy!) for the stresses I can put on it. It would make a lot of sense if there were two versions of the Ergon seatpost, as well as two versions of frames, forks, whatever, focused on rider weights--but I expect that adds in to cost, which is tough to swallow, particularly nowadays, so I get it.
@Hoggyp - First, I apologize for not being sensitive to the needs of lighter riders. You are correct- Much is overbuilt for people lighter/smaller in stature than the average rider bikes are built for.
And you are correct in assuming that cost is why we do not see what you are suggesting. It makes more sense to aim for the middle, where most riders are (as far as these companies know), and let fly with one version of a product.
But it would make sense in terms of matching the best/most efficient use of materials to rider weight as they do with sizing. Small sized bikes would, by that measure, have components to best suit lighter riders. Seems to make sense.
That is until you come across the 5'2" person that weighs 250lbs. Then what?
And the variability in human size and mass ends up making this gambit all but impossible to do, so back to the default settings then, right?
Yeah, I'm not sure what the answer is unless you went a bespoke route which would cost a fortune.
Post a Comment