 |
| Not where you should review a gravel bike. |
Just exactly the type of terrain everyone has at their disposal and wants to ride a "gravel bike" on, right?
Well...... No, not really.
I mean, I'm not going to tell anyone where they can ride whatever bike they want to ride, but in a review? I think you really need to review any bike on terrain it was meant to be ridden on. This is another reason why "gravel" in the bike's name is the wrong term. Had this been called an "all-road" bike, the ridiculousness of how this bike was reviewed would have been immediately obvious to the journo that was making the video. Having said that, it should have been painfully obvious anyway.
I have reviewed products for years and I take pride in how I do that process. Now, I'm not here to throw shade on other reviewers. I'm just taken back by this reviewing of a road bike on mountain bike terrain. A thing you can do - yes, obviously - but it isn't the point, or should not be, of a gravel bike review.
Then I came across this nugget on posted by a user of Threads:
"Every gravel bike review is always obsessing about the same things. Tire clearance?! UDH?! Is it compatible with the same set up that Dylan Johnson used at Unbound?!?! It's so boring and repetitive."
 |
| Maybe try some gravel roads to test your bikes, eh? |
This is the other facet of most cycling media that seems to keep living on and on. The utterly ridiculous focus on the elite racer, their gear, and the misconception of how racing informs every cyclists choice when it comes to gear and bicycles.
Elite level cyclists who are finely tuned athletes make up way less than one percent of the world's cycling folks. Way less than one percent. Yet I would wager that more than 90% of what passes as reviews and opinions on cycling, what is proffered for events, and what gets focused on in general, is Pro/Elite level people, gear, and associated things like training, etc.
That does not make any sense. Now, I would also like to point out that certain segments of cycling media don't focus on this stuff that represents so little of the world's cyclists. If you get the chance, look up some electric bike media. It is so different than what you'd see from 100% human powered cycling media that it looks alien to my jaded eyes. At least what I see there is actually relevant to everyday cyclists.
All I am saying is if and when I see something like that bike review of a "gravel" bike done on MTB trails, or any obviously incongruent review things, I am not prone to putting any trust in the source. I'm sure I cannot be the only one thinking this.
8 comments:
" "Every gravel bike review is always obsessing about the same things. Tire clearance?! UDH?! Is it compatible with the same set up that Dylan Johnson used at Unbound?!?! It's so boring and repetitive." "
Me again :)
I had a 2020 Scott Addict Gravel up until a month ago, and I did some racing, but not a lot. Gravel is mainly a training tool and a way to get out and get into my own thoughts for me. As I got on in years with that bike, I wanted a little more tire on it. Some of the faster descents taken on that bike made me pretty dang nervous as I just didn't perceive I had the traction I needed. Especially if there was a curve in the fast descent.
So as I was looking to replace that bike I knew I wanted something that could fit more than a 38 (knobs) or 40 (smooth) that the Scott could handle. As I did my research, I was looking at things like the Kona Ouroboros and the Salsa Cutthroat, but they both had more of an adventure flair, and while I don't race a lot, I still like a bike that feels spunky.
As I dove into all the other options, I was nearly sold on a Rodeo Labs Traildonkey for Flannimal, and then I saw the 3T Extrema Italia. It has massive tire clearance and a focus on still getting sporty at times, and it looked (to me) gorgeous. Of course, the price and availability made that bad boy a no-go for me.
In all that research, I kept hearing about Dylan Johnson and some of the wacky things he was doing on bikes. As I dove into his YouTube channel, it became clear he was doing a lot of actual research. I got really hung up on the 2.2 Race King as he talked about how good its rolling resistance was even compared to most (all?) 50mm gravel tires. I decided that no matter the bike I got, I really wanted to give that a shot.
I've got 213.3 miles on my new Lauf Seigla now, and I could not be happier. It is sporty as all get out but comfy, and descending fast gravel is no big deal. I'm running those 2.2 Race Kings and am just thoroughly impressed with how fast they roll, how comfy they are, and how confident they make the ride. Aren't those three things characteristics of what any rider would benefit from? THAT is why some of us are so fanatical about ensuring new gravel bikes have clearance for these big tires. It just makes the bike so much better for everyone.
As for UDH - c'mon.... future-proofing. No one wants to buy a bike that already can't handle where the market is going.
@Tyler Loewens - Thanks for that comment!
Choices. That's basically what I am reading here from you. I get that.
I will tell you that I have been on MTB tires on a drop bar bike while careening down a 40mph hill with a curve in it in Northeast Iowa and I did not have control nor was I comfortable with that. So, there is a bit more to this than "just tires".
I have witnessed many riders doing the same thing on skinnier tires and handling things like it is no big deal.
You want to try those big Conti tires because Dylan said it was good. Gotcha. He's one guy with a certain skill set and talents. His "what works for him" is being challenged and some people are finding some of what he is saying is true with caveats.
Choices.
Reviewing bicycles was the focus of my post, specifically gravel bikes and how things are portrayed in reviews in the cycling media. The quote I pulled isn't my own, but I feel that many people are a bit jaded by how bicycles are reviewed most commonly. That was my point in pulling that comment.
While you might enjoy getting into the weeds when it comes to technical things, it is apparent that a certain segment of the reading public finds those details tedious and missing what they are looking for. I think that is something worth discussing.
I have always highly valued a gravel bike that can also rip sections of singletrack. Yes, this has led me to also prefer larger than average tires, so I’m gladly giving up speed on the road for traction on the trail. One of the things that keeps me interested in gravel riding is the ability to ride out my door, to a park with singletrack, and home again on the same bike.
For me, that’s a big part of what it’s all about… Everyone’s perspective, even Dylan Johnson’s, is potentially valuable, but shouldn’t be taken for any more or less than what it is ––an opinion and a direction on setup.
Congrats on the new Seigla, @Tyler Loewens! Sounds like you made a great choice for the riding you want to do. I love mine!!
Thanks Matt!
Mark - I am completely on board with your comments about reviews of gravel bikes on MTB trails being more than silly. No qualms there.
My long, coffee-fueled rant was more related to something you and some others in the industry are starting to focus on (to be fair, you have been making this point for many years now :)). What the Pros ride is not a good indicator of what everyone else should ride. I completely agree with that, with the one caveat: In this case, I think what DJ has pioneered here with the larger tires IS something that everyone should be excited about for all the reasons I listed above. It just makes for a much better rider experience no matter what you are going after.
Anyhow - hopefully you are getting the snow we are FINALLY getting in Nebraska. I'm getting excited to break ye olde fat bike out.
@Tyler Loewens - Appreciate you, Tyler! Thanks! And yes - we are getting snow finally. Not that great for fat biking, as it is the very dry, powdery stuff, but we will have to make do!
I use to run Race Kings as a rear racing tire for Mtn bikes in 2013. It is still a great tire, and really I am shocked it has not gotten more love until recently. I do not recall an issue with them at all. I am trying to remember what marketing kool-aid got me away from Conti, other WTB bigger volume tires. Persoanlly Tyler, ride your ride and keep on keeping on.
Keep me posted on this Lauf Siegla, Morgan is itching for a new Gravel bike.
@N.Y. Roll - Continental tires were perennially undersized and their tubeless tires often stretched up to 4mm after mounting which was a bit alarming. That was when I wrote off ever using them again.
It may be a good time to revisit Conti, but since they have a reputation for being slow to innovate into new areas, I think many riders just never really gave them a chance.
I've read reviews on their gravel tires and while they are now seemingly "okay", there are a lot of gravel tires that are at least as good, if not better, at competitive prices. So, unless there is some characteristic to Conti gravel tires that other brands do not possess it doesn't make sense to me to just swap over to their stuff. I'm just not seeing that right now.
Post a Comment