Friday News And Views

 A Weekly Appearance in Today's FN&V:

Cycling Sports Fantasy League Announced:

Life Time Sports announced last week that they are promoting a fantasy league where individuals can choose riders who they think will do well on Life Time's Grand Prix series. 

The Grand Prix is a series of seven events spread across MTB and gravel disciplines. 60 riders are taking part, evenly split amongst Men and Women. The riders must appear at five of the seven events and one of those has to be the season concluding Big Sugar 100 mile gravel event in the Ozarks. 

The top 15 Male and Female athletes at the end of the series will be invited back for the 2025 season with the remaining slots to be filled by invitation. 

Fans of the series now can choose five Men and five Women who they think will finish best at each event. Fans can only pick the same rider twice, making the fantasy league more challenging, and making each fan get to know more athletes in the series. Points for the best choices will be awarded for each event and then a season champion will be crowned at the end of the series. Details can be found at this link HERE. 

Comments: It is no secret than fan based fantasy sports leagues are very popular. While fantasy sports are typical in stick and ball sports, it is rare to see this in the cycling niche. Life Time, no doubt, gets information and that can be sold to advertisers and marketers. Maybe some day they monetize the league further, but besides the harvesting of info, they also will hopefully get more engagement and possibly more people buying into their events via registration fees. 

It is an interesting twist in the continued monetization of cycling sports and gravel events in particular.

The Stinner MADE Photo Stick

Portable Bike Prop For Photos Announced:

At the last MADE Show, (custom bicycle show, sort of like what NAHBS used to be), Stinner, a custom bicycle brand, showed a "Photo Stick". This is a device that is, essentially, a stand to lean a bike on for remote photo shooting. 

The device got its name from the MADE Show so it is called the MADE Photo Stick. It breaks down into three pieces which can screw together by the use of water bottle bosses and threaded bits which are welded into the steel rods that make up the MADE Photo Stick. 

The MADE Photo Stick is Cerekoted steel and has rubber tips. There will be a raw, bead blasted titanium version edition in limited numbers available soon as well. Price for the steel version has been set at $59.99. 

Image courtesy of Ridley Bikes

Ridley Bikes Debuts Entry Level Gravel Bike:

Ridley Bikes, located in Belgium where the UCI Gravel World Championships will be held (??!!) has announced a new, entry level model for gravel riding and urban cycling called the "Kalazy"

The Kalazy will be offered in three types, one with a flat bar. The spec is 8 speed Claris or 10 speed Sora. Drop bar models have flat mount mechanical disc brakes from Tektro while the flat bar model has hydraulic brakes. 

While the bikes have a focus on gravel, and share the same geometry as Ridley's Kanzo gravel bikes, these Kalazy models also have some nods to urban cycling as well. The frames feature braze ons for a stand brake, and there is a mount for a rear mount kickstand as well. Traditional rack and fender mounts, along with top tube "bento bag" mounts are also featured. 

Image courtesy of Ridley Bikes

Probably the most surprising feature of the Kalazy frame is the use of fully internalized cable routing. Cables will exit the handlebar and pass through a boot where the stem spacers would normally be visible and then through the headset and frame. This is a feature normally not seen on entry level bikes. 

Prices range from about $1299.00 - $1599.00 USD. 

Comments: This introduction is something of a surprise from Ridley Bikes who normally have not dabbled in "entry level bikes" in the past. It is a welcomed thing, as far as I am concerned, to see a company at least try to serve this market and it could launch Ridley in the US as a contender for the average gravel cycling fan's dollar. It could also serve the gravel cyclist that is looking for a gravel bike to use for general purpose riding and therefore save the race bike for racing.  

However "entry level" bikes at over 1K is something I'll have to get used to. The floor for entry keeps getting raised, and I understand that everything is more expensive these days, but still... 

Image courtesy of Ridley Bikes

That said, where have you seen any company send out a presser for a gravel bike that sits in this price range? Maybe Salsa Cycles Journeyer, but besides that? This is pretty rare and I applaud Ridley Bikes for at least trying this. 

I'm not sure how it will play in North America, as the Ridley dealer base is not widespread, but if the presser is to be believed, these Kalazy bikes should be a hit in Belgium and Europe. 

The presser said that the features which are more urban oriented are maybe a bit unusual for a gravel bike, but this sentiment only underlines, in my opinion, how "gravel" was the wrong term all along for these bikes. To my mind, the Klazy represents exactly what I thought the "all - around" bicycle should have been from the get-go. Yes - you could ride gravel, but the bike should also be a practical bike for everyday use as well.  This Kalazy model is a prototypical example of my ideal "all - arounder" bike. 

By the way, the Kalazy can handle up to 47mm tires, which really makes this bike even more interesting from a practicality standpoint. The geometry, again based on the Kanzo, so it is dialed in to what I would consider to be a good, all - around stable geometry for everyday riding. So, overall, I like the bike and besides the goofy all-internal routing, I have no quibbles with the Kalazy.

Image courtesy of YT Industries

YT Industries Announces More Affordable Szepter Gravel Bike:

Another shot at making a bike nmore affordable here with YT Industries announcing a spec level addition to its Szepter range. 

The Szepter Core 2 model features the same carbon frame and geometry as the other models in the range but has a spec that lowers the retail price to $3,499.00 USD. 

The Szepter Core 2 features a Suntour GVX 32 40mm travel gravel fork, DT Swiss G1800 wheels and a Shimano GRX drive train. 

Comments: The term "affordable" can mean different things. Obviously, a boutique MTB brand offering a gravel bike in carbon is not going to be able to reduce costs at the same level as a brand moving more numbers, so you have to look at this in context. 

It is interesting how the MTB-centric brand's gravel bikes all feature geometry reflective of the 'geo-du jour' reflected in MTB bikes in 2024. Slack (for gravel) head tube angles and steep seat tube angles. The slack head tube angles do not scare me, but I am not sure that steep seat tube angles are the answer, even if you use the bike on single track. YT says the steep seat tube angle benefits climbing. But at 74.3°, it feels like we are talking about a tri-bike geometry. It just seems like it is the wrong direction to go for a gravel bike. 

But this is probably the "enduro-dude's" gravel bike and is built to appeal to such folks. Probably not so much aimed at a Mid-Western, miles upon miles of rollers type of rider. I get that, if that is what YT is doing here. 

Image courtesy of Wolf Tooth Components

Wolf Tooth Announces New Ripsaw Flat Pedals:

And you thought we'd get out of this FN&V without a mention from Wolf Tooth? Ha! No way! 

I honestly don't plan this, but it seems that Wolf Tooth's marketing strategy for 2024 is to release some news once a week. Well, this time it is a pedal machined and assembled in their Minnesota headquarters called the Ripsaw.

The Ripsaw is a $199,99 pedal that is CNC machined from a block of aluminum billet and, according to Wolf Tooth, that takes 37 minutes per pedal body. 

The Ripsaw pedals have replaceable pins and are rebuildable as well. They are 118mm long and 102mm in width. The platform is thin, being about 12mm at the thickest end, and have a slight, concave shape to help hold the foot. The Ripsaw pedals are available in Raw, Black, or Purple anodized finishes. 

That's a wrap for this week! Thanks for reading Guitar Ted Productions and I hope that you get out for some riding this weekend!

Friday News And Views

A Maersk container ship. Image courtesy of Maersk.

Bicycle Part Shortages Predicted To Persist Through '21:

Multiple industry sources are predicting bicycle and bicycle parts shortages throughout 2021. This means that what you currently are seeing at bicycle shops isn't going to get better, and in fact, it may get worse. Multiple reasons are given, but one of the major problems is due to the bottlenecks in shipping. 

Many of you may not realize this, but 90% or more of what you use for cycling comes to you via a ship. Usually this is a "container ship" like the one shown here. Containers are filled, (which can be an issue for smaller companies because partially filled containers don't get shipped), these are then loaded onto a container ship which doesn't leave dock until it is full, then it sails across the seas, (can take up to two months), and then it must get unloaded, the containers are inspected by customs, released, trucked to warehouses, and finally goods are shipped to regional warehouses, and then to distributors, and finally (!!) to bike shops or online vendors. 

What has happened is that pandemic protocols are affecting labor and thus disrupting the system. Furthermore, as we know, demand has doubled or more. This has caused a lot of pressure on shipping lanes. Not just in bicycles, mind you, but with everything. The sudden increases are at such a high level that I have been told that over 100 container ships are sitting outside of Los Angeles harbor waiting their turn to get unloaded right at this very minute, and it has been that way for months. Added to that are docks in the Far East with stacks of containers waiting for a ship to return, and in some cases, factories have no containers at all! 

What does this all mean for us? Well, for one thing, you should baby that drive train, milking it for all it is worth because cassettes and chains, not to mention chain rings, will be hard to get in 2021. Tires will be hard to get as well. Oh, and expect prices to climb a LOT higher as demand outstrips supplies. 

I expect that as a COVID-19 vaccine gets distributed amongst the population, that many will feel the need to do events, and these events will increase demand on parts even further due to high wear and tear, or people just thinking they need to have brand new everything before an event. I'm telling you right now- that's a pipe dream next year. 

And new bikes? Ha! I've heard from several dealers that they have had to pre-order 2021 inventory and if they really get it, (not guaranteed), that will be your choice. Many are pre-selling orders they have placed and I expect shop floors will be pretty sparse, if not empty, most of next year. Oh, and don't expect to get a deal either. High demand = full boat pricing. Got a used rig? Next year is the year to ditch it. Just don't expect to be able to get a replacement. 

Gravel Worlds Updates Website- Offers New Category:

Last weekend the Pirate Cycling League unveiled a new website update for their Gravel Worlds event. They also have announced a new, ultra-distance event category called "The Long Voyage", a self-supported, 300 mile distance which should be completed within 30 hours. (Sound familiar?)

Besides this, the site has added a history page telling the back story of the Gravel Worlds event. I've shared with you readers much of this backstory here in the past, so you may already know this. If you don't know the background on Gravel Worlds, you should check this out. It's important because, really- Gravel Worlds is one of the last of the first. Let me explain.....

Back in 2005 Trans Iowa started. and we hosted a few folks from the Lincoln area who were already riding gravel, but this whole idea of putting an event on gravel was new. They got inspired by Trans Iowa and further by the DK200 in 2006 and in 2008 they put on "The Good Life Gravel Adventure" and started their own history. Many other events came about in those early days that were 'big deals', the most notable being the Almanzo 100 in 2007. However; of all the 'biggies', not many are around yet today. Barry-Roubaix and Gravel Worlds are the biggest ones left from those earliest days of Gravel.  

So, I love that Gravel Worlds has embraced this history now. They deserve to be successful and the event has evolved to be inclusive of all abilities possible and yet it still retains much of the flavor of the early gravel events. So, if you are one of those folks that thinks gravel events are all commercialized and have lost their grassroots feel, then Gravel Worlds is for you. 

And don't listen to any of the current nonsense that claims that gravel riding/racing is "something new within the last several years". Or you could just interpret any messaging of that sort to mean, "We've never really looked into the history of modern gravel events, so we are just spouting off to make ourselves look like we know what we're talking about". Because......obviously- they have no clue if that's what they are saying. Whatever.... Go check out Gravel Worlds! It's The Real Deal. (And Gravel Worlds should use that tag-line)  

The Ventum GS1 gravel bike. (Image courtesy of Ventum's site)

"Have You Seen This...?":

N.Y. Roll texted me last weekend to ask if I had seen a brand of gravel bike called "Ventom" . I replied, "No". He sends a link. I checked it out later. 

Hmm......Where have I seen that before?, I thought to myself. Because this whole frame and fork doesn't look all that unique or different to my eyes. And in fact, it isn't very unique at all. 

The Viathon from Walmart is very similar, so is the Rondo Ruut, the Ibis Hakka MX, Santa Cruz's Stigmata, and a whole host of carbon fiber niche branded bikes. Geometry is nearly identical across all of these, suggesting that (a) there is a LOT of copy-catting going on and (b) perhaps many of these frames are being chosen by these brands from a catalog at a Far East factory. 

Interestingly, the Ventum direct-to-consumer model bases its appeal in coming from the triathlon market and has testimonials from some former Pro road racers and a well known cycling media/DK200 racer. So, once again, just as with the former/current road race bike sales model, we are basing our opinions of 'worth' on racing? (Which is okay if you are are racing) I don't know that most gravel bicycle riders are racing, or that they should be racing. Maybe having fun is better than racing? Maybe.... 

Look, this is a great bike, (maybe) if you want to own a mean, nasty, flat out race machine, which, you know, is good at one thing. But this model strikes me as not a bike for the masses, not a very original design, and it is hard to see the value in their $2,000.00+ asking price for the frame/fork when, as an example, the aforementioned Viathon frame/fork is sub-$700.00 on sale now. Even at full-boat pricing the Viathon is about a grand less. And ithe Viathon was an 'okay' bike, again, if you wanted a racy rig. Now, the Ventum GS1 may very well be a better value, but it is very difficult to see it if so due to the vast similarities across so many other frames/forks like it.

In my opinion, these bikes like the Ventum are not displaying a big enough difference from other very similar looking frames/forks and with no face-to-face support after the sale, it would seem like a less than a good way to make it in the crowded market of gravel bikes. But then again, it is a seller's market now. This is also indicative of what the industry is doing to an excellent idea again- That is, the industry is homogenizing an aspect of cycling around racing. 

This is another subject for another day, and I aim to get to it, but suffice it to say that for now, this entry into the gravel bike market is not what it should be all about for cyclists of all types who would benefit more from an all-around type road bike that I have been banging on about here for over a decade. 
 

Despite the model, the shirt looks pretty good here!

The "G-Ted Logo" Shirt Review:

A couple weeks ago I announced on here that I had "G-Ted Logo" merch available via Redbubble on a page benefiting my daughter. I mentioned that each sale would have a portion of the money going to her. I receive no compensation whatsoever from this. So, this does not benefit me in the least, unless you get one of these and wear it and get someone new to read the blog. Okay? There is that.....

Anyway, I said I was getting a shirt, paid for with my own money, by the way, and that I would give y'all a bit of a review of it. Well, I've had it for over a week now and I must say, it is impressive. As impressive as a t-shirt can be, which is to say, nothing all that spectacular. 

I mean, let's face it, a t-shirt either does its job or it does not. This one does, and it better! I bought the "Premium" t-shirt model and it came out to around $34.00 with shipping and whatever else they nail you for on Redbubble. So, yeah, a very expensive t-shirt. But it shows. It's got some flat-lock stitching, the fabric is smooth and supple, and it fits very well. I got an XL sized one and I would say the fit was on the slightly generous side. Which means it is very comfortable to wear. 

The graphic is done in a very thick, almost rubbery feeling print and went through the wash and drier cycle with zero effects upon it. The graphic is pretty bold and BIG, but that's how I designed it. Oh, and as you all know, this is the graphic I have used over the years here quite a bit on the blog, so most of you probably recognize it, but there is a short story behind it, and it goes back to my job in the 80's.

I was a jewelry designer, and during certain times I also would be tasked to do art for the shop, advertisements, art for our shop logos, proposed logos for spin-off companies, and even logos for other businesses. Locals may remember the "North Bank Restaurant" or the Waterloo Greyhound Park, well I helped design those logos for those businesses. (Long gone, but maybe someone out there recalls those) 

Anywho..... I was asked to come up with ideas for a spin-off company my boss at the time was going to launch and I did a ton of sketches, some which were basically goofing off, sort of exercises in getting ideas. So, during this I came up with a cube with a skull on it that had smoke coming out of the skull's orifices. That eventually morphed into the cube idea without the skull, and with the addition of the "G-Ted" logo, I was kind of going for that 'microphone ID box thingie deal that you see on reporter's microphones on T.V. Well, this was all sketched up and then I think Jeff Kerkove eventually saw it, digitized it, cleaned it up for me, and there ya go! 

That's the tale in brief. Now you know! If you are so inclined to want your own t-shirt, hoodie, stickers, or a pin with this "G-Ted" logo, go to the Redbubble page for this merch HERE.  

And that's a wrap! Have a safe, awesome weekend! Thanks for reading!

Friday News And Views

A Maersk container ship. Image courtesy of Maersk.

Bicycle Part Shortages Predicted To Persist Through '21:

Multiple industry sources are predicting bicycle and bicycle parts shortages throughout 2021. This means that what you currently are seeing at bicycle shops isn't going to get better, and in fact, it may get worse. Multiple reasons are given, but one of the major problems is due to the bottlenecks in shipping. 

Many of you may not realize this, but 90% or more of what you use for cycling comes to you via a ship. Usually this is a "container ship" like the one shown here. Containers are filled, (which can be an issue for smaller companies because partially filled containers don't get shipped), these are then loaded onto a container ship which doesn't leave dock until it is full, then it sails across the seas, (can take up to two months), and then it must get unloaded, the containers are inspected by customs, released, trucked to warehouses, and finally goods are shipped to regional warehouses, and then to distributors, and finally (!!) to bike shops or online vendors. 

What has happened is that pandemic protocols are affecting labor and thus disrupting the system. Furthermore, as we know, demand has doubled or more. This has caused a lot of pressure on shipping lanes. Not just in bicycles, mind you, but with everything. The sudden increases are at such a high level that I have been told that over 100 container ships are sitting outside of Los Angeles harbor waiting their turn to get unloaded right at this very minute, and it has been that way for months. Added to that are docks in the Far East with stacks of containers waiting for a ship to return, and in some cases, factories have no containers at all! 

What does this all mean for us? Well, for one thing, you should baby that drive train, milking it for all it is worth because cassettes and chains, not to mention chain rings, will be hard to get in 2021. Tires will be hard to get as well. Oh, and expect prices to climb a LOT higher as demand outstrips supplies. 

I expect that as a COVID-19 vaccine gets distributed amongst the population, that many will feel the need to do events, and these events will increase demand on parts even further due to high wear and tear, or people just thinking they need to have brand new everything before an event. I'm telling you right now- that's a pipe dream next year. 

And new bikes? Ha! I've heard from several dealers that they have had to pre-order 2021 inventory and if they really get it, (not guaranteed), that will be your choice. Many are pre-selling orders they have placed and I expect shop floors will be pretty sparse, if not empty, most of next year. Oh, and don't expect to get a deal either. High demand = full boat pricing. Got a used rig? Next year is the year to ditch it. Just don't expect to be able to get a replacement. 

Gravel Worlds Updates Website- Offers New Category:

Last weekend the Pirate Cycling League unveiled a new website update for their Gravel Worlds event. They also have announced a new, ultra-distance event category called "The Long Voyage", a self-supported, 300 mile distance which should be completed within 30 hours. (Sound familiar?)

Besides this, the site has added a history page telling the back story of the Gravel Worlds event. I've shared with you readers much of this backstory here in the past, so you may already know this. If you don't know the background on Gravel Worlds, you should check this out. It's important because, really- Gravel Worlds is one of the last of the first. Let me explain.....

Back in 2005 Trans Iowa started. and we hosted a few folks from the Lincoln area who were already riding gravel, but this whole idea of putting an event on gravel was new. They got inspired by Trans Iowa and further by the DK200 in 2006 and in 2008 they put on "The Good Life Gravel Adventure" and started their own history. Many other events came about in those early days that were 'big deals', the most notable being the Almanzo 100 in 2007. However; of all the 'biggies', not many are around yet today. Barry-Roubaix and Gravel Worlds are the biggest ones left from those earliest days of Gravel.  

So, I love that Gravel Worlds has embraced this history now. They deserve to be successful and the event has evolved to be inclusive of all abilities possible and yet it still retains much of the flavor of the early gravel events. So, if you are one of those folks that thinks gravel events are all commercialized and have lost their grassroots feel, then Gravel Worlds is for you. 

And don't listen to any of the current nonsense that claims that gravel riding/racing is "something new within the last several years". Or you could just interpret any messaging of that sort to mean, "We've never really looked into the history of modern gravel events, so we are just spouting off to make ourselves look like we know what we're talking about". Because......obviously- they have no clue if that's what they are saying. Whatever.... Go check out Gravel Worlds! It's The Real Deal. (And Gravel Worlds should use that tag-line)  

The Ventum GS1 gravel bike. (Image courtesy of Ventum's site)

"Have You Seen This...?":

N.Y. Roll texted me last weekend to ask if I had seen a brand of gravel bike called "Ventom" . I replied, "No". He sends a link. I checked it out later. 

Hmm......Where have I seen that before?, I thought to myself. Because this whole frame and fork doesn't look all that unique or different to my eyes. And in fact, it isn't very unique at all. 

The Viathon from Walmart is very similar, so is the Rondo Ruut, the Ibis Hakka MX, Santa Cruz's Stigmata, and a whole host of carbon fiber niche branded bikes. Geometry is nearly identical across all of these, suggesting that (a) there is a LOT of copy-catting going on and (b) perhaps many of these frames are being chosen by these brands from a catalog at a Far East factory. 

Interestingly, the Ventum direct-to-consumer model bases its appeal in coming from the triathlon market and has testimonials from some former Pro road racers and a well known cycling media/DK200 racer. So, once again, just as with the former/current road race bike sales model, we are basing our opinions of 'worth' on racing? (Which is okay if you are are racing) I don't know that most gravel bicycle riders are racing, or that they should be racing. Maybe having fun is better than racing? Maybe.... 

Look, this is a great bike, (maybe) if you want to own a mean, nasty, flat out race machine, which, you know, is good at one thing. But this model strikes me as not a bike for the masses, not a very original design, and it is hard to see the value in their $2,000.00+ asking price for the frame/fork when, as an example, the aforementioned Viathon frame/fork is sub-$700.00 on sale now. Even at full-boat pricing the Viathon is about a grand less. And ithe Viathon was an 'okay' bike, again, if you wanted a racy rig. Now, the Ventum GS1 may very well be a better value, but it is very difficult to see it if so due to the vast similarities across so many other frames/forks like it.

In my opinion, these bikes like the Ventum are not displaying a big enough difference from other very similar looking frames/forks and with no face-to-face support after the sale, it would seem like a less than a good way to make it in the crowded market of gravel bikes. But then again, it is a seller's market now. This is also indicative of what the industry is doing to an excellent idea again- That is, the industry is homogenizing an aspect of cycling around racing. 

This is another subject for another day, and I aim to get to it, but suffice it to say that for now, this entry into the gravel bike market is not what it should be all about for cyclists of all types who would benefit more from an all-around type road bike that I have been banging on about here for over a decade. 
 

Despite the model, the shirt looks pretty good here!

The "G-Ted Logo" Shirt Review:

A couple weeks ago I announced on here that I had "G-Ted Logo" merch available via Redbubble on a page benefiting my daughter. I mentioned that each sale would have a portion of the money going to her. I receive no compensation whatsoever from this. So, this does not benefit me in the least, unless you get one of these and wear it and get someone new to read the blog. Okay? There is that.....

Anyway, I said I was getting a shirt, paid for with my own money, by the way, and that I would give y'all a bit of a review of it. Well, I've had it for over a week now and I must say, it is impressive. As impressive as a t-shirt can be, which is to say, nothing all that spectacular. 

I mean, let's face it, a t-shirt either does its job or it does not. This one does, and it better! I bought the "Premium" t-shirt model and it came out to around $34.00 with shipping and whatever else they nail you for on Redbubble. So, yeah, a very expensive t-shirt. But it shows. It's got some flat-lock stitching, the fabric is smooth and supple, and it fits very well. I got an XL sized one and I would say the fit was on the slightly generous side. Which means it is very comfortable to wear. 

The graphic is done in a very thick, almost rubbery feeling print and went through the wash and drier cycle with zero effects upon it. The graphic is pretty bold and BIG, but that's how I designed it. Oh, and as you all know, this is the graphic I have used over the years here quite a bit on the blog, so most of you probably recognize it, but there is a short story behind it, and it goes back to my job in the 80's.

I was a jewelry designer, and during certain times I also would be tasked to do art for the shop, advertisements, art for our shop logos, proposed logos for spin-off companies, and even logos for other businesses. Locals may remember the "North Bank Restaurant" or the Waterloo Greyhound Park, well I helped design those logos for those businesses. (Long gone, but maybe someone out there recalls those) 

Anywho..... I was asked to come up with ideas for a spin-off company my boss at the time was going to launch and I did a ton of sketches, some which were basically goofing off, sort of exercises in getting ideas. So, during this I came up with a cube with a skull on it that had smoke coming out of the skull's orifices. That eventually morphed into the cube idea without the skull, and with the addition of the "G-Ted" logo, I was kind of going for that 'microphone ID box thingie deal that you see on reporter's microphones on T.V. Well, this was all sketched up and then I think Jeff Kerkove eventually saw it, digitized it, cleaned it up for me, and there ya go! 

That's the tale in brief. Now you know! If you are so inclined to want your own t-shirt, hoodie, stickers, or a pin with this "G-Ted" logo, go to the Redbubble page for this merch HERE.  

And that's a wrap! Have a safe, awesome weekend! Thanks for reading!

Gravel Grinder News: Guitar Ted Defines Gravel Riding Terms

It's a gravel road. Period.

 NOTE: Large doses of "my opinion" will be handed out in gloppy dollops today. You've been forewarned.....

This whole deal with riding bicycles on gravel has generated a huge trend in cycling. No doubt it is on par with the mountain bike craze of the 80's/90's and the "ten speed", so called "bike boom" of the 70's. Along with those bumps in bicycle popularity came several terms which remain in our bicycling vocabulary to this day. Today I am going to discuss, rate, and define some terms that have sprung up around this gravel cycling scene. Some well known, some maybe not so much.

First of all, I should disclose that I asked folks who follow me on Twitter about terms for gravel riding that annoyed them. Some of their feedback has informed today's post as well. 

My system will work like this: First I will list the "Term", then a rating of that term, then my definition and discussion, which may include bits of feedback I received on Twitter. Keep in mind that this is not an unabridged version, nor is it anyone else's opinion but my own when it comes to the veracity of the terms described here. This is my version of "the facts", and it may not conform to yours, or your beliefs.

With that said......onward.

"Gravel" (As A Category Within Cycling): Rating: Really Dumb. Definition and Comments: Well, anymore it is whatever marketing says is a product for riding off-pavement. I've seen shoes that ten years ago would have been readily accepted and described as "mountain bike shoes" now done up in a different color and with the "Gravel" label plastered onto the box the shoes come in. You get the picture here. Really this is an unfortunate and lazy label that grew from how the cycling industry understood cycling. Namely- from a racing perspective, and not as an "every-man's transportation, transformative" viewpoint, which is what I was advocating for back in the day. The term "gravel" is so limiting, and the cycling industry really has fouled the waters with the use of this term. But here we are. It's what we have to work with now. Still.....really dumb.


Gravel Bike (See Above Also): Rating: Unfortunate, uninspired, short-sighted. Definition and Comments: A bike that you ride on gravel, that works for what you want and are doing, is a gravel bike. That said, the industry is trying to move this category more towards what amounts to a wider tire clearanced road racing bike. This was not what I had wanted to see ten years ago. My vision was for an "any-road" bike that most people would be better served by, rather than the racing bike derived "road bikes" of the 90's-2000's. Bottom line: Many brands within the industry are bent upon ruining this category, seemingly. Ditto for many in the current entrenched cycling media.


Gravel Grinder (See Also "Grinder"): Rating: Cool if you know the history. Dumb if you don't. Definition and Comments: Completely misunderstood and misused term. Originally anyone training on road bikes on crushed rock roads in the Mid-West of the US called what they were doing "gravel grinding". This was a term coined back decades ago, long before Trans Iowa, and long before anyone ever thought riding on gravel roads was a "good thing", which, by the way, a LOT of people still think is a crazy idea. Nowadays many events call themselves "gravel grinders" because it seems like the thing to do, or because it makes their marketing sound more "mainstream gravel". All I know is that many times when the term is used out of context and without understanding where it came from it becomes annoying to many folks. (See "Gravel Race/Event/Ride" below)

This was called "gravel grindeing" for decades before the current gravel scene started. The term makes sense when applied correctly. (Image of T.I.v14 by Celeste Mathias)

 Groad (See Also "G-Road"): Rating: Really Dumb. Definition and Comments: A conjunction of the term "gravel road" I first saw used in an "Outside Online" article by Frank Bures in 2013 which was describing the burgeoning gravel scene. Whether or not Mr. Bures came up with this term, I've no idea, but I do know I was dismayed when I saw he used it. If the reaction I got from Twitter is any indication, most folks find this term extremely annoying.  

Groadie: Rating: Juvenile. Definition and Comments: A contraction of "gravel roadie" which is kind of ironic since most gravel riders would not identify as a roadie. In the end, it just comes off as some juvenile terminology for a cyclist which just sounds dumb to outsiders and exclusionary to the casual cyclist. It should be banished from our vocabulary. We're smarter than this......

Grav-Grav: Rating: Seriously? Definition and Comments: I've seen this used for what riding on gravel roads is, or for what the activity surrounding an event is, and frankly, it's really childish. I know.....I know. Some people are just being silly out there and trying to have some fun. #OkayBoomer Yeah......

Gravel Race/Event/Ride: This is a bit different, but this is a term that I wanted to cover because some folks are saying their events are "gravel" events when....well, are they really? I used to hold a standard for events wanting to get on my old Gravel Grinder News calendar. The event had to have a course with more than 50% of its mileage in gravel. It also could not have more than 10% of its course mileage in single track.

Imagine if these two simple prerequisites were in force for events today. I'm betting there would be a LOT fewer events under the "gravel" category. And frankly, I am okay with that. There are "back roads" events that should promote themselves as such, and there are fire road events that should present themselves as such. There are events with miles and miles of dirt roads that call themselves "gravel grinders" that should not call themselves that.

 See, this is what happened when we assigned the term "gravel" to mean "off-pavement cycling". It's misleading, it causes misunderstandings, and it ultimately turns many people off. I'm all for calling events on miles of crushed rock roads "gravel events", because that's what they are, and calling them that informs would-be participants that is what they can expect. Calling a ride with mostly dirt roads and pavement sections a "gravel grinder" is not informing would be participants correctly. Nor is it good to call a mostly paved ride with unpaved sectors a "gravel event".

To wrap things up: Again- these are just my thoughts and opinions, and a few comments I gathered from Twitter which seem to support my views. You may disagree. Cool!  I'm all ears and would love to hear the reasons why I am wrong, if you think I am. I also would love to know if you have other terms for the gravel scene which you've heard that you think are silly, dumb, or irritate the bejesus out of you. List those in the comments and I may do a "Part 2" on this. Stay tuned for a follow up on some other things I learned from Twitter users that are subjects that bother them related to gravel riding.That post will publish here on Saturday.

Gravel Grinder News: Guitar Ted Defines Gravel Riding Terms

It's a gravel road. Period.

 NOTE: Large doses of "my opinion" will be handed out in gloppy dollops today. You've been forewarned.....

This whole deal with riding bicycles on gravel has generated a huge trend in cycling. No doubt it is on par with the mountain bike craze of the 80's/90's and the "ten speed", so called "bike boom" of the 70's. Along with those bumps in bicycle popularity came several terms which remain in our bicycling vocabulary to this day. Today I am going to discuss, rate, and define some terms that have sprung up around this gravel cycling scene. Some well known, some maybe not so much.

First of all, I should disclose that I asked folks who follow me on Twitter about terms for gravel riding that annoyed them. Some of their feedback has informed today's post as well. 

My system will work like this: First I will list the "Term", then a rating of that term, then my definition and discussion, which may include bits of feedback I received on Twitter. Keep in mind that this is not an unabridged version, nor is it anyone else's opinion but my own when it comes to the veracity of the terms described here. This is my version of "the facts", and it may not conform to yours, or your beliefs.

With that said......onward.

"Gravel" (As A Category Within Cycling): Rating: Really Dumb. Definition and Comments: Well, anymore it is whatever marketing says is a product for riding off-pavement. I've seen shoes that ten years ago would have been readily accepted and described as "mountain bike shoes" now done up in a different color and with the "Gravel" label plastered onto the box the shoes come in. You get the picture here. Really this is an unfortunate and lazy label that grew from how the cycling industry understood cycling. Namely- from a racing perspective, and not as an "every-man's transportation, transformative" viewpoint, which is what I was advocating for back in the day. The term "gravel" is so limiting, and the cycling industry really has fouled the waters with the use of this term. But here we are. It's what we have to work with now. Still.....really dumb.


Gravel Bike (See Above Also): Rating: Unfortunate, uninspired, short-sighted. Definition and Comments: A bike that you ride on gravel, that works for what you want and are doing, is a gravel bike. That said, the industry is trying to move this category more towards what amounts to a wider tire clearanced road racing bike. This was not what I had wanted to see ten years ago. My vision was for an "any-road" bike that most people would be better served by, rather than the racing bike derived "road bikes" of the 90's-2000's. Bottom line: Many brands within the industry are bent upon ruining this category, seemingly. Ditto for many in the current entrenched cycling media.


Gravel Grinder (See Also "Grinder"): Rating: Cool if you know the history. Dumb if you don't. Definition and Comments: Completely misunderstood and misused term. Originally anyone training on road bikes on crushed rock roads in the Mid-West of the US called what they were doing "gravel grinding". This was a term coined back decades ago, long before Trans Iowa, and long before anyone ever thought riding on gravel roads was a "good thing", which, by the way, a LOT of people still think is a crazy idea. Nowadays many events call themselves "gravel grinders" because it seems like the thing to do, or because it makes their marketing sound more "mainstream gravel". All I know is that many times when the term is used out of context and without understanding where it came from it becomes annoying to many folks. (See "Gravel Race/Event/Ride" below)

This was called "gravel grindeing" for decades before the current gravel scene started. The term makes sense when applied correctly. (Image of T.I.v14 by Celeste Mathias)

 Groad (See Also "G-Road"): Rating: Really Dumb. Definition and Comments: A conjunction of the term "gravel road" I first saw used in an "Outside Online" article by Frank Bures in 2013 which was describing the burgeoning gravel scene. Whether or not Mr. Bures came up with this term, I've no idea, but I do know I was dismayed when I saw he used it. If the reaction I got from Twitter is any indication, most folks find this term extremely annoying.  

Groadie: Rating: Juvenile. Definition and Comments: A contraction of "gravel roadie" which is kind of ironic since most gravel riders would not identify as a roadie. In the end, it just comes off as some juvenile terminology for a cyclist which just sounds dumb to outsiders and exclusionary to the casual cyclist. It should be banished from our vocabulary. We're smarter than this......

Grav-Grav: Rating: Seriously? Definition and Comments: I've seen this used for what riding on gravel roads is, or for what the activity surrounding an event is, and frankly, it's really childish. I know.....I know. Some people are just being silly out there and trying to have some fun. #OkayBoomer Yeah......

Gravel Race/Event/Ride: This is a bit different, but this is a term that I wanted to cover because some folks are saying their events are "gravel" events when....well, are they really? I used to hold a standard for events wanting to get on my old Gravel Grinder News calendar. The event had to have a course with more than 50% of its mileage in gravel. It also could not have more than 10% of its course mileage in single track.

Imagine if these two simple prerequisites were in force for events today. I'm betting there would be a LOT fewer events under the "gravel" category. And frankly, I am okay with that. There are "back roads" events that should promote themselves as such, and there are fire road events that should present themselves as such. There are events with miles and miles of dirt roads that call themselves "gravel grinders" that should not call themselves that.

 See, this is what happened when we assigned the term "gravel" to mean "off-pavement cycling". It's misleading, it causes misunderstandings, and it ultimately turns many people off. I'm all for calling events on miles of crushed rock roads "gravel events", because that's what they are, and calling them that informs would-be participants that is what they can expect. Calling a ride with mostly dirt roads and pavement sections a "gravel grinder" is not informing would be participants correctly. Nor is it good to call a mostly paved ride with unpaved sectors a "gravel event".

To wrap things up: Again- these are just my thoughts and opinions, and a few comments I gathered from Twitter which seem to support my views. You may disagree. Cool!  I'm all ears and would love to hear the reasons why I am wrong, if you think I am. I also would love to know if you have other terms for the gravel scene which you've heard that you think are silly, dumb, or irritate the bejesus out of you. List those in the comments and I may do a "Part 2" on this. Stay tuned for a follow up on some other things I learned from Twitter users that are subjects that bother them related to gravel riding.That post will publish here on Saturday.

"Real" Road Bikes

Not a "road bike"? I beg to differ.

You know, I'd say since about 2011 or so I have been debating and thinking about what these fatter tire, slightly slacker road going bikes should be called. Many said "gravel bike", and at one time I offered this as a solution as well. However; even back seven years ago I understood that the term "gravel" was too limiting, and that another name needed to be used.

All sorts of things were offered up as a name for these bikes, which in my opinion, are more versatile and therefore more useful to the general cycling public than what was known as "road bikes". Road bikes, traditional road bikes", have skinny tires, limited usefulness, and foster an aggressive, "suffering" style of riding that isn't what most folks think of as "useful" or "fun". Type 2 fun notwithstanding, road bikes are generally a pain in the butt for most customers of the shop where I work. They want higher seated positions, they want a rack, they want a kickstand, fer cryin out loud. But they've been duped by marketing and have fallen under the spell of the siren call of carbon fiber.

There is a dichotomy here, a diverging trail- One leading to "the sale", where sexy marketing focusing on speed, lightweight, and technology get the customer hooked. Then there is "The Reality" when folks find out road bikes require a decent amount of physical fitness and don't have many features that they really want in a bike.

It has always been my belief that folks needed a bike that suited their needs, was reasonably lightweight, and wasn't beholden to staying on smooth pavement for the entirety of its lifespan. That bike, I have always reasoned, is what we call "gravel bikes". But that name is all wrong! The name these bikes should have is road bikes. That's right. The name for those skinnier tire, performance driven, singularly purposed bicycles should not be "road bikes". They should be called by their right name- racing bikes. 

Bred from competition. Made to look like a Pro's bike- Meet the "Racing Bike"

 I was struck by this totally obvious observation after having read this opinion piece on "Velo News". The entire search for a new name for these "gravel bikes" is not a wise thing to do. The "right name" for these bikes was right under our noses all the time, and it had been usurped by what the industry calls "road bikes", which really are not "road" bikes at all. "Certain roads bikes", yes. But not all roads are suited to racing bicycles. Not to mention all purposes......

When I was a kid, we knew these performance oriented bikes as "racers", or "road racers". Many of us called them "ten speed racing bikes", which became shortened to simply "ten speeds". It was understood that these bikes were "racing bikes", and not the kind of bike for everyday usage in terms of the average citizen. Somehow or another, in the late 90's, this got turned on its head when racing bikes became known as "road bikes". Probably due to the rise in popularity of "off-road", or "mountain bikes". The opposite of those would be "road bikes", but other than bicycles purposed for racing, what was there in the US market? Nothing, unless you went in for the hard-to-understand "hybrid" bike, which, if you didn't know, was an offshoot of fat tired "road bikes" which were purposed to go on any road. (Bruce Gordon's Rock and Road model, being the forebear of these.) Somewhere along the line those bikes got cross-bred with mountain bikes and ended up becoming 29"ers, but that's another story.

Marketers are a savvy bunch. Connecting the word "racing" to "road bikes" wasn't selling bikes. So.......drop the racing bit. Now they have become misunderstood as being "the road bike" and anything else isn't a "road bike". But that is just plain wrong. All the "sexy" attributes of these bikes- lightweight, speed, technology- were touted, but the fact that they were totally based on road bike racing geometry and rider positioning was swept under the rug. Not to mention the single purpose design philosophy which renders these bikes as not very versatile.

Road bike sales have suffered of late, and one of the reasons why is easy to see- road biking isn't safe. So, these "gravel bikes' have allowed folks to get off the dangerous paved highways. The aforementioned "Velo News" piece's author acknowledges this. The thing is, this isn't going to change anytime soon. That will take years to change. Maybe decades. Then the author offers that millennials  could be a solution because they don't do automobiles as much as their predecessors, (but......infrastructure!), and while they are bound by financial constraints, (but road racing bikes are expensive), they would rather look at their phones than drive a car, (Uh.....what?!), and on....

Obviously that is an odd defense of racing bikes. The author then goes on to say that gravel bikes are a "band-aid" solution and not the answer. I think that notion is dead wrong. The problem is, and always has been, that racing bikes aren't the answer to most people's road biking needs. "Real road bikes", the ones we pigeon hole as "gravel bikes", are the solution. The name needs to be what it should have been all along though. Not "gravel", not "all-road", just road bikes, because these bikes can do all the roads and more. Racing bikes.......not so much.

"Real" Road Bikes

Not a "road bike"? I beg to differ.

You know, I'd say since about 2011 or so I have been debating and thinking about what these fatter tire, slightly slacker road going bikes should be called. Many said "gravel bike", and at one time I offered this as a solution as well. However; even back seven years ago I understood that the term "gravel" was too limiting, and that another name needed to be used.

All sorts of things were offered up as a name for these bikes, which in my opinion, are more versatile and therefore more useful to the general cycling public than what was known as "road bikes". Road bikes, traditional road bikes", have skinny tires, limited usefulness, and foster an aggressive, "suffering" style of riding that isn't what most folks think of as "useful" or "fun". Type 2 fun notwithstanding, road bikes are generally a pain in the butt for most customers of the shop where I work. They want higher seated positions, they want a rack, they want a kickstand, fer cryin out loud. But they've been duped by marketing and have fallen under the spell of the siren call of carbon fiber.

There is a dichotomy here, a diverging trail- One leading to "the sale", where sexy marketing focusing on speed, lightweight, and technology get the customer hooked. Then there is "The Reality" when folks find out road bikes require a decent amount of physical fitness and don't have many features that they really want in a bike.

It has always been my belief that folks needed a bike that suited their needs, was reasonably lightweight, and wasn't beholden to staying on smooth pavement for the entirety of its lifespan. That bike, I have always reasoned, is what we call "gravel bikes". But that name is all wrong! The name these bikes should have is road bikes. That's right. The name for those skinnier tire, performance driven, singularly purposed bicycles should not be "road bikes". They should be called by their right name- racing bikes. 

Bred from competition. Made to look like a Pro's bike- Meet the "Racing Bike"

 I was struck by this totally obvious observation after having read this opinion piece on "Velo News". The entire search for a new name for these "gravel bikes" is not a wise thing to do. The "right name" for these bikes was right under our noses all the time, and it had been usurped by what the industry calls "road bikes", which really are not "road" bikes at all. "Certain roads bikes", yes. But not all roads are suited to racing bicycles. Not to mention all purposes......

When I was a kid, we knew these performance oriented bikes as "racers", or "road racers". Many of us called them "ten speed racing bikes", which became shortened to simply "ten speeds". It was understood that these bikes were "racing bikes", and not the kind of bike for everyday usage in terms of the average citizen. Somehow or another, in the late 90's, this got turned on its head when racing bikes became known as "road bikes". Probably due to the rise in popularity of "off-road", or "mountain bikes". The opposite of those would be "road bikes", but other than bicycles purposed for racing, what was there in the US market? Nothing, unless you went in for the hard-to-understand "hybrid" bike, which, if you didn't know, was an offshoot of fat tired "road bikes" which were purposed to go on any road. (Bruce Gordon's Rock and Road model, being the forebear of these.) Somewhere along the line those bikes got cross-bred with mountain bikes and ended up becoming 29"ers, but that's another story.

Marketers are a savvy bunch. Connecting the word "racing" to "road bikes" wasn't selling bikes. So.......drop the racing bit. Now they have become misunderstood as being "the road bike" and anything else isn't a "road bike". But that is just plain wrong. All the "sexy" attributes of these bikes- lightweight, speed, technology- were touted, but the fact that they were totally based on road bike racing geometry and rider positioning was swept under the rug. Not to mention the single purpose design philosophy which renders these bikes as not very versatile.

Road bike sales have suffered of late, and one of the reasons why is easy to see- road biking isn't safe. So, these "gravel bikes' have allowed folks to get off the dangerous paved highways. The aforementioned "Velo News" piece's author acknowledges this. The thing is, this isn't going to change anytime soon. That will take years to change. Maybe decades. Then the author offers that millennials  could be a solution because they don't do automobiles as much as their predecessors, (but......infrastructure!), and while they are bound by financial constraints, (but road racing bikes are expensive), they would rather look at their phones than drive a car, (Uh.....what?!), and on....

Obviously that is an odd defense of racing bikes. The author then goes on to say that gravel bikes are a "band-aid" solution and not the answer. I think that notion is dead wrong. The problem is, and always has been, that racing bikes aren't the answer to most people's road biking needs. "Real road bikes", the ones we pigeon hole as "gravel bikes", are the solution. The name needs to be what it should have been all along though. Not "gravel", not "all-road", just road bikes, because these bikes can do all the roads and more. Racing bikes.......not so much.

Is A Gravelly Bubble About To Burst?

There is even a bike named "Gravel" now. (Image courtesy of Grannygear)

Well, the "dust" has settled after Sea Otter and the overall vibe from the show was that gravel "everything" was front and center. Well, that and the so-called "e-bike". Funny...... I haven't seen much, if any press coverage on that though. 

My partner Ben was there and messaged me during the festival over the weekend to say that road bikes are dead. "Nail in coffin. Rotting", was the way he put it. Another press report from the festival by the esteemed James Huang of "Cyclingtips.com" echoed the same sentiment. Now, it should be pointed out that Sea Otter was, and is still, a mountain bike festival. Road bikes did feature in the event only due to the road races around the Laguna Seca Raceway there where the venue is. But if the vibe was that "road is dead", then that is saying something. Think about that for a minute......

Huang wrote in his Sea Otter coverage, "This is no fad; gravel bikes are clearly here to stay, and there’s a growing tidal wave of interest behind them." So, as he further went on to indicate, media outlets heavily weighted toward Pro road racing were now going to be covering gravel. And why wouldn't they? If consumer interests have swung over to doing gravel events, riding gravel, and especially when purchasing new gear related to gravel, then it only makes sense to, as they say, "follow the money".

Niner's controversial full suspension gravel rig. (Image courtesy of Grannygear)

And who can blame these companies? Seriously, it is what you are supposed to do when in business- sell what the consumer wants. You may think that this whole "gravel" thing is all just "marketing". (Read- evil intentions of heartless corporations to bilk innocent people of their dollars for no good reason) That isn't how this is working at all.

People are leaving the organized, licensed crit/road racing scene in the U.S. in droves. Just a few years ago, USAC, the sanctioning body for such road events, reported a precipitous drop in license sales and participation numbers in their events fell drastically. Sanctioned mountain bike racing has shown little to no growth for years. So where were all the people going? Were they quitting cycling altogether? Many did, but most went somewhere else, and by the numbers of events seen on gravel, it would be apparent that gravel/back road events are where people are spending their time and money. Of course the industry is going to chase that. You can only blame yourselves for this, cyclists. Stop doing gravel and the industry will drop gravel like a hot potato.

But that said, has the industry gone too far with offerings for this niche segment of cycling, or will it continue to cannibalize mountain and road bike sales into the future? How does the electric motor figure into all of this? Hard to say. But one possibility here is troubling.

Breezer Bikes has debuted a new adventure line. (Image courtesy of Grannygear)

Remember when fat bikes came around in an easy to buy, complete bike format in 2011? (Pugsleys were frame/fork only from 2005-2011) Yeah, then a short two years later everyone had a fat bike in their line. Companies with zero fat bike "cred" were producing corpulent tired monster bikes and trying to surf the fat biking wave. It didn't work out.......

That "bubble" burst in 2014 and sales of fat bikes, once a sure thing for Mid-Western shops, became a tough sell. Everyone that wanted one had one. Many companies have dropped fat bikes from their lines in the last few years or have severely curtailed their offerings. Fat bikes were once a runaway sales hit, and while they will never go away, it will never be like it was for three years or so there.

One could argue that gravel-all road bikes are on the same trajectory. Companies with no background in "adventure" style bikes are now jumping in with both feet into this market. Mountain bike companies that never really pushed road anything have "gravel bikes" now. Get the picture here? It sounds a lot like the same song sung in 2011-2013 with fat bikes.

My sincere hope is that road cycling just becomes "any road cycling". That the road racing style bikes be cornered into the niche place they belonged in all along- for the committed crit racer only. The "common road bike" going forward should be what we are calling "gravel bikes" now and that silly moniker- "gravel"- should just go away. The whole point, at least for me, was that a bike with capable tires and slacker geometry with fittings to promote versatility would become the de-facto choice for most cyclists all over the U.S.A.

But the cycling industry and media keep getting caught up in traditional pigeon holes and in chasing trends so much that they cannot seem to see where this could go. That's the biggest problem I see. If it goes like it has been, I fully expect the bubble to pop, but it doesn't have to be that way.

Is A Gravelly Bubble About To Burst?

There is even a bike named "Gravel" now. (Image courtesy of Grannygear)

Well, the "dust" has settled after Sea Otter and the overall vibe from the show was that gravel "everything" was front and center. Well, that and the so-called "e-bike". Funny...... I haven't seen much, if any press coverage on that though. 

My partner Ben was there and messaged me during the festival over the weekend to say that road bikes are dead. "Nail in coffin. Rotting", was the way he put it. Another press report from the festival by the esteemed James Huang of "Cyclingtips.com" echoed the same sentiment. Now, it should be pointed out that Sea Otter was, and is still, a mountain bike festival. Road bikes did feature in the event only due to the road races around the Laguna Seca Raceway there where the venue is. But if the vibe was that "road is dead", then that is saying something. Think about that for a minute......

Huang wrote in his Sea Otter coverage, "This is no fad; gravel bikes are clearly here to stay, and there’s a growing tidal wave of interest behind them." So, as he further went on to indicate, media outlets heavily weighted toward Pro road racing were now going to be covering gravel. And why wouldn't they? If consumer interests have swung over to doing gravel events, riding gravel, and especially when purchasing new gear related to gravel, then it only makes sense to, as they say, "follow the money".

Niner's controversial full suspension gravel rig. (Image courtesy of Grannygear)

And who can blame these companies? Seriously, it is what you are supposed to do when in business- sell what the consumer wants. You may think that this whole "gravel" thing is all just "marketing". (Read- evil intentions of heartless corporations to bilk innocent people of their dollars for no good reason) That isn't how this is working at all.

People are leaving the organized, licensed crit/road racing scene in the U.S. in droves. Just a few years ago, USAC, the sanctioning body for such road events, reported a precipitous drop in license sales and participation numbers in their events fell drastically. Sanctioned mountain bike racing has shown little to no growth for years. So where were all the people going? Were they quitting cycling altogether? Many did, but most went somewhere else, and by the numbers of events seen on gravel, it would be apparent that gravel/back road events are where people are spending their time and money. Of course the industry is going to chase that. You can only blame yourselves for this, cyclists. Stop doing gravel and the industry will drop gravel like a hot potato.

But that said, has the industry gone too far with offerings for this niche segment of cycling, or will it continue to cannibalize mountain and road bike sales into the future? How does the electric motor figure into all of this? Hard to say. But one possibility here is troubling.

Breezer Bikes has debuted a new adventure line. (Image courtesy of Grannygear)

Remember when fat bikes came around in an easy to buy, complete bike format in 2011? (Pugsleys were frame/fork only from 2005-2011) Yeah, then a short two years later everyone had a fat bike in their line. Companies with zero fat bike "cred" were producing corpulent tired monster bikes and trying to surf the fat biking wave. It didn't work out.......

That "bubble" burst in 2014 and sales of fat bikes, once a sure thing for Mid-Western shops, became a tough sell. Everyone that wanted one had one. Many companies have dropped fat bikes from their lines in the last few years or have severely curtailed their offerings. Fat bikes were once a runaway sales hit, and while they will never go away, it will never be like it was for three years or so there.

One could argue that gravel-all road bikes are on the same trajectory. Companies with no background in "adventure" style bikes are now jumping in with both feet into this market. Mountain bike companies that never really pushed road anything have "gravel bikes" now. Get the picture here? It sounds a lot like the same song sung in 2011-2013 with fat bikes.

My sincere hope is that road cycling just becomes "any road cycling". That the road racing style bikes be cornered into the niche place they belonged in all along- for the committed crit racer only. The "common road bike" going forward should be what we are calling "gravel bikes" now and that silly moniker- "gravel"- should just go away. The whole point, at least for me, was that a bike with capable tires and slacker geometry with fittings to promote versatility would become the de-facto choice for most cyclists all over the U.S.A.

But the cycling industry and media keep getting caught up in traditional pigeon holes and in chasing trends so much that they cannot seem to see where this could go. That's the biggest problem I see. If it goes like it has been, I fully expect the bubble to pop, but it doesn't have to be that way.

What's In A Name?

From the mountain to the smooth paved surfaces- a bike like this can cover a lot of ground.

The cycling industry is hell bent on discovering the "next thing" in cycling to make a living off of. Currently those niche ideas are e-mtb's and the gravel bike category. However; I have had the opinion and still do, that the cycling industry is actually doing itself more harm than good by calling these bikes for any road, "gravel bikes".

I've been saying that since 2012-13 or so and I even went as far as "crowd sourcing" an idea for a different name for these bikes which came up with inconclusive results.  Why? Because calling these bikes "gravel bikes" is like calling fat bikes "snow bikes". If you don't get snow, or would never consider riding on/in it, then you are going to instantly eliminate such a bike as a possibility for you. That's what happens when we say "gravel bike". It is limiting and unnecessarily puts people off the idea of owning, for all intents and purposes, what is probably the smartest bicycle they could buy.

So, what name should we use? (Here we go again!) Well, I thought long and hard about this and I came up with something. It has to be easy, not really exclusive, but inclusive, and maybe the less understood it is the better. This name follows a similar convention to "mountain bike" which is often abbreviated as "mtb", although it is possible that a lot of folks really don't think what those three letters actually mean.

So, my idea is to call these bikes "All Purpose Bikes" or APB's in short. They serve the wide and varied gulf between mountain and road racing. The anywhere, do almost anything" bike that can be a gravel road going rig, a commuter, a light touring rig, a CX bike in a pinch, can do light single track, and also keep up on the club ride or Gran Fondo ride. RAGBRAI? A perfect bike for that. Skinny tires fit, but this bike would be defined by an ability to swallow 35mm tires at a minimum and 45's max, or then it becomes something else.

Okay, I've put that out there, that's my suggestion. What's yours?