Randomonium

  NOTE: Okay folks, if you haven't been around long enough here to know what a "Randomonium" post is, then here is the deal. I ramble, rant, and randomly moan about all things cycling in one, incohesive, bizarre post. "Randomonium", okay?

The refreshed Standard Rando v2

Standard Rando v2/Single Speed Wheel Update:

The refreshing of, and rebuilding of wheels for, the Standard Rando v2 is now complete. The final piece of the puzzle came in last week and I was able to get in a decent test ride before the cold came back again. 

To recap: I wanted a single speed specific wheel for the Standard Rando v2 since my Turkey Burn ride last November. That metric century ride proved to me beyond a doubt that I wanted to stick with single speed for this bike. 

Originally, back in 2020, when I got this bike, I was intending for it to be a geared bike, but what with the pandemic and all, I was fortunate to just get it up and running as a single speed. I left things as is and well, that is how it is going to be. 

So, instead of tying up a geared rear wheel on a single speed that would never see gears, I decided I needed a new wheel set. That prompted the purchase of a Paul rear single speed WORD hub with the through axle for the Standard Rando's 12mm through axle rear end. I inadvertently ordered a 32 spoke hole hub instead of a 28 hole drilling, as I had intended, because I had a set of 28 hole Velocity Blunt SS rims sitting in the Lab waiting to be laced to something. 

So, I ordered up a 32 hole Blunt SS rim. I had the spokes on hand and in the right colors to do my "Guitar Ted Signature" build which is black spokes on one side and silver on the other, reversed for the other wheel. So- Drive side rear = black, drive side front = silver, reversed for non-drive side. I dunno why.....I just think it looks cool! 

I am pretty sure every spoke is double butted and all have brass nipples. The front is something of an oddball. I have the original wheel set - well.....I had it, now one part is modified! Anyway, the front wheel rim, one side of the spokes, and the hub was a part of the Noble GX-5's original build. I took out the black spokes on one side and replaced them with silver, and boom! Done!

The rim is a Stan's Grail and the hub is a Stan's 'vanilla', average front hub. No big deal that they do not match because from five feet away, you cannot tell the difference. Maybe some day I'll get another Blunt SS and relace that, but I doubt I will. At any rate, I still have a good pair of Blunt SS rims waiting for hubs and spokes instead of one lone rim with no mate. 

Finally, I had to get a single speed freewheel. I really wanted to get a White Industries one, but I don't have White Industries money to spend at the moment, so I got an Origin 8 'Black Ops' 20T free wheel, (It's just s Far East free wheel, but a pretty good one) and put that on. We will see how long it hold up to Iowa gravel!  More soon.....

Testing the Redshift Sports ShockStop Pro post here.

Redshift ShockStop Pro Post Thoughts So Far...

I'm reviewing this for Riding Gravel (Standard Disclaimer applies) and while it looks like the post I reviewed previously here, it is almost nothing like that post. It is a very different experience. In that linked review I state that this post 'isolates the rider from vibrations'. This version does not seem to be the same in that manner. I'm still not sure what level of damping, if any, is going on here. 

It also does not feel 'floaty' at all. The previous ShockStop post I tried does kind of, well.....suspend you. It is a suspension seat post, after all. The coil spring sags under your weight until the spring rate supports you and you are kind of disconnected from the rest of the bike at that point. Full suspension mountain bike riders will be quite familiar with this feeling. It may be quite disconcerting for road riders or new-to-the-sport people. It does feel odd at first. 

But this post, which has one stock spring rate which is not user adjustable, does not do that. Nothing of the sort, so it feels more like a standard post. Now at that point, my mind is thinking 'why not just use a flexible standard post, like the Whiskey Carbon, or PRO Carbon Dyneema posts that I like so well?'

And there is the conundrum I am faced with sorting out at the moment. Is the Redshift Sports ShockStop Pro 'not worth it', or is it a 'bad design'? NO! It is a really well executed design and does work, but my question I have to answer is for which riders, and to what degree does this post complete its mission? I don't know the answers to those questions yet.

More ride time. That's what I need here.......

A 420mm axle to crown fork on my Blackbuck circa 2008.

More On Forks & Their Effects On Bikes:

 Last week's Ghost Grappler introduction cracked open the can-o-worms again concerning how fork length and offset can dramatically affect handling. This was because the Ghost Grappler, ("GG" from here on out), has a short (420mm) rigid fork with 50mm offset and that fork, the "Dinner Fork", is available aftermarket. 

I was asked in the comments about how such a fork would work on a 29'er. I said "Not very well", and that I had tried this. Well, today I bring you my examples.

In January of 2008 I got my OS Bikes Blackbuck and later that year I tried 8 different forks on it, all of which had different offsets and axle to crown lengths. In my testing I used the same wheels, tires, and I strove to keep the cockpit the same across all the set ups. (Which was a whole nuther story) This was to eliminate as many variables as I could. 

The Blackbuck with its stock rigid fork.

I'll spare you all the techno-mumbo-jumbo and cut to the chase. The shortest forks I tried were both 420mm axle to crown. The Black Ops was a cabon/aluminum composite fork with (if I recall correctly) 38mm offset. The Blackbuck fork, (came with the frame), had a 51mm offset. Both forks resulted in a waaaaaay steep 74° head angle. It was the offsets that were the diference maker. 

And boy! What a difference! That Black Ops fork was dead feeling and handled very weirdly. I did not like it at all. The Blackbuck fork was razor-sharp quick. You had to be on your "P's and Q's" to ride it. One moment of broken concentration and you were on your butt off the side of the trail. 

Neither was what I would call 'ideal' to ride. So, how does that relate to this GG fork- the Dinner Fork? Well, it has the same axle to crown as the two forks I tested 14 years ago. But it leans more towards the Blackbuck fork I have, with its 50mm offset than it does in regard to that old Black Ops fork. So, on most 29"er hard tails with shorter stock forks, you'd end up with 'crit bike' handling and a nervousness on technical terrain that would require maximum concentration to control. On a longer forked, 'modern-day' trail bike? No. Just no.... Those bikes are made to have LONG forks on them. Like 500mm and longer axle to crown forks, so a 420mm fork would be, almost, unrideable. 

So, unless your 29"er was made to have a 470mm or shorter fork stock, I'd forget about the GG fork as an option. That's my take.

Want more about forks? Let me know in the comments. 

That's it for today, thank you for reading!

Randomonium

  NOTE: Okay folks, if you haven't been around long enough here to know what a "Randomonium" post is, then here is the deal. I ramble, rant, and randomly moan about all things cycling in one, incohesive, bizarre post. "Randomonium", okay?

The refreshed Standard Rando v2

Standard Rando v2/Single Speed Wheel Update:

The refreshing of, and rebuilding of wheels for, the Standard Rando v2 is now complete. The final piece of the puzzle came in last week and I was able to get in a decent test ride before the cold came back again. 

To recap: I wanted a single speed specific wheel for the Standard Rando v2 since my Turkey Burn ride last November. That metric century ride proved to me beyond a doubt that I wanted to stick with single speed for this bike. 

Originally, back in 2020, when I got this bike, I was intending for it to be a geared bike, but what with the pandemic and all, I was fortunate to just get it up and running as a single speed. I left things as is and well, that is how it is going to be. 

So, instead of tying up a geared rear wheel on a single speed that would never see gears, I decided I needed a new wheel set. That prompted the purchase of a Paul rear single speed WORD hub with the through axle for the Standard Rando's 12mm through axle rear end. I inadvertently ordered a 32 spoke hole hub instead of a 28 hole drilling, as I had intended, because I had a set of 28 hole Velocity Blunt SS rims sitting in the Lab waiting to be laced to something. 

So, I ordered up a 32 hole Blunt SS rim. I had the spokes on hand and in the right colors to do my "Guitar Ted Signature" build which is black spokes on one side and silver on the other, reversed for the other wheel. So- Drive side rear = black, drive side front = silver, reversed for non-drive side. I dunno why.....I just think it looks cool! 

I am pretty sure every spoke is double butted and all have brass nipples. The front is something of an oddball. I have the original wheel set - well.....I had it, now one part is modified! Anyway, the front wheel rim, one side of the spokes, and the hub was a part of the Noble GX-5's original build. I took out the black spokes on one side and replaced them with silver, and boom! Done!

The rim is a Stan's Grail and the hub is a Stan's 'vanilla', average front hub. No big deal that they do not match because from five feet away, you cannot tell the difference. Maybe some day I'll get another Blunt SS and relace that, but I doubt I will. At any rate, I still have a good pair of Blunt SS rims waiting for hubs and spokes instead of one lone rim with no mate. 

Finally, I had to get a single speed freewheel. I really wanted to get a White Industries one, but I don't have White Industries money to spend at the moment, so I got an Origin 8 'Black Ops' 20T free wheel, (It's just s Far East free wheel, but a pretty good one) and put that on. We will see how long it hold up to Iowa gravel!  More soon.....

Testing the Redshift Sports ShockStop Pro post here.

Redshift ShockStop Pro Post Thoughts So Far...

I'm reviewing this for Riding Gravel (Standard Disclaimer applies) and while it looks like the post I reviewed previously here, it is almost nothing like that post. It is a very different experience. In that linked review I state that this post 'isolates the rider from vibrations'. This version does not seem to be the same in that manner. I'm still not sure what level of damping, if any, is going on here. 

It also does not feel 'floaty' at all. The previous ShockStop post I tried does kind of, well.....suspend you. It is a suspension seat post, after all. The coil spring sags under your weight until the spring rate supports you and you are kind of disconnected from the rest of the bike at that point. Full suspension mountain bike riders will be quite familiar with this feeling. It may be quite disconcerting for road riders or new-to-the-sport people. It does feel odd at first. 

But this post, which has one stock spring rate which is not user adjustable, does not do that. Nothing of the sort, so it feels more like a standard post. Now at that point, my mind is thinking 'why not just use a flexible standard post, like the Whiskey Carbon, or PRO Carbon Dyneema posts that I like so well?'

And there is the conundrum I am faced with sorting out at the moment. Is the Redshift Sports ShockStop Pro 'not worth it', or is it a 'bad design'? NO! It is a really well executed design and does work, but my question I have to answer is for which riders, and to what degree does this post complete its mission? I don't know the answers to those questions yet.

More ride time. That's what I need here.......

A 420mm axle to crown fork on my Blackbuck circa 2008.

More On Forks & Their Effects On Bikes:

 Last week's Ghost Grappler introduction cracked open the can-o-worms again concerning how fork length and offset can dramatically affect handling. This was because the Ghost Grappler, ("GG" from here on out), has a short (420mm) rigid fork with 50mm offset and that fork, the "Dinner Fork", is available aftermarket. 

I was asked in the comments about how such a fork would work on a 29'er. I said "Not very well", and that I had tried this. Well, today I bring you my examples.

In January of 2008 I got my OS Bikes Blackbuck and later that year I tried 8 different forks on it, all of which had different offsets and axle to crown lengths. In my testing I used the same wheels, tires, and I strove to keep the cockpit the same across all the set ups. (Which was a whole nuther story) This was to eliminate as many variables as I could. 

The Blackbuck with its stock rigid fork.

I'll spare you all the techno-mumbo-jumbo and cut to the chase. The shortest forks I tried were both 420mm axle to crown. The Black Ops was a cabon/aluminum composite fork with (if I recall correctly) 38mm offset. The Blackbuck fork, (came with the frame), had a 51mm offset. Both forks resulted in a waaaaaay steep 74° head angle. It was the offsets that were the diference maker. 

And boy! What a difference! That Black Ops fork was dead feeling and handled very weirdly. I did not like it at all. The Blackbuck fork was razor-sharp quick. You had to be on your "P's and Q's" to ride it. One moment of broken concentration and you were on your butt off the side of the trail. 

Neither was what I would call 'ideal' to ride. So, how does that relate to this GG fork- the Dinner Fork? Well, it has the same axle to crown as the two forks I tested 14 years ago. But it leans more towards the Blackbuck fork I have, with its 50mm offset than it does in regard to that old Black Ops fork. So, on most 29"er hard tails with shorter stock forks, you'd end up with 'crit bike' handling and a nervousness on technical terrain that would require maximum concentration to control. On a longer forked, 'modern-day' trail bike? No. Just no.... Those bikes are made to have LONG forks on them. Like 500mm and longer axle to crown forks, so a 420mm fork would be, almost, unrideable. 

So, unless your 29"er was made to have a 470mm or shorter fork stock, I'd forget about the GG fork as an option. That's my take.

Want more about forks? Let me know in the comments. 

That's it for today, thank you for reading!

Minus Ten Review- 40

Ten years ago I rode in the pines on the North Side of Ingawanis.

Ten years ago on the blog I was a week back from Interbike and processing a bunch of info. That was back in the heyday of the 29"ers acceptance and growth. Things were humming right along then. Well......with the exception of the economy. The "Great Recession" was just hitting the news then and we were fearful in the cycling industry about just what that might mean for us going forward.

One of the things I was working through was trying to get a test bike for the then new Gates Carbon Drive, or just belts, if you will. I'd tried one the year before at Interbike when Gates was out in huge numbers touting the superiority of the system over traditional chains. Only........you couldn't use it with derailleurs, so...... Yeah. There's that. Oh! Internal geared hubs though! Right........ There's Rohloff and...... Expensive and anything else is not as reliable or doesn't have the range of gearing. Whatever.....

The point was that Gates was telling us this was the best thing since sliced bread, so I listened to their story, mounted up, and then got the belt to "ratchet". (Read: skipped a tooth) Funny thing happened then. Gates said they needed to go back to the drawing board. Yeah....... Marketing fail.

Then they came out with Center Track, which did a great job making single speed riding with a belt more reliable. But my set up will still ratchet in super high torque situations. And you still can't use a derailleur set up.

Then I also had just about wrapped up my fork experiment. The Blackbuck was the bike and I swapped a whole bunch of forks in and out of that bike to show that you could make anything work, if you liked the handling. Offset and axle to crown measurements were also discussed along with trail figure and what that all meant. It was fun, but I made my head hurt with all the tinkering with numbers.

And the first "Touring Tuesdays" posts were rolling out. That was a fun series which is being reposted every Sunday now for a while. Check it out......

Minus Ten Review- 40

Ten years ago I rode in the pines on the North Side of Ingawanis.

Ten years ago on the blog I was a week back from Interbike and processing a bunch of info. That was back in the heyday of the 29"ers acceptance and growth. Things were humming right along then. Well......with the exception of the economy. The "Great Recession" was just hitting the news then and we were fearful in the cycling industry about just what that might mean for us going forward.

One of the things I was working through was trying to get a test bike for the then new Gates Carbon Drive, or just belts, if you will. I'd tried one the year before at Interbike when Gates was out in huge numbers touting the superiority of the system over traditional chains. Only........you couldn't use it with derailleurs, so...... Yeah. There's that. Oh! Internal geared hubs though! Right........ There's Rohloff and...... Expensive and anything else is not as reliable or doesn't have the range of gearing. Whatever.....

The point was that Gates was telling us this was the best thing since sliced bread, so I listened to their story, mounted up, and then got the belt to "ratchet". (Read: skipped a tooth) Funny thing happened then. Gates said they needed to go back to the drawing board. Yeah....... Marketing fail.

Then they came out with Center Track, which did a great job making single speed riding with a belt more reliable. But my set up will still ratchet in super high torque situations. And you still can't use a derailleur set up.

Then I also had just about wrapped up my fork experiment. The Blackbuck was the bike and I swapped a whole bunch of forks in and out of that bike to show that you could make anything work, if you liked the handling. Offset and axle to crown measurements were also discussed along with trail figure and what that all meant. It was fun, but I made my head hurt with all the tinkering with numbers.

And the first "Touring Tuesdays" posts were rolling out. That was a fun series which is being reposted every Sunday now for a while. Check it out......

Minus Ten Review -36

Hard to handle, but imminently ride-able.

Ten years ago on the blog I posted what still is pretty much my thoughts on fork offset, front end geometry, and how that affects handling.

"In the end, most combinations are immanently ride able and most of us would be able to handle the bike with whatever geometry we want to consider. Whether it fits an individuals style and how a bike should handle in their mind is going to vary quite a bit from person to person. That is what I think is great about today versus five years ago. Back then, you were stuck in a box handling-wise, only being able to vary how a bike rode incrementally with a head angle change. Now you can have it spicy or mild, or anywhere in between. I love it and it opens up a whole different set of perspectives on what a good handling bike really is."

There were thoughts shared on Trans Iowa and the recon for v5. I split the course finding duties with David Pals that year. He rode a lot of his bits and eventually I was to join him in doing that for what would become v7 a couple of years later. The recon of the course in this manner was a big lifting of weight off my shoulders and I was very relieved to have David working in the capacity that he did back then. 

Finally, by this point in 2008, Salsa Cycles had introduced the Fargo. The name had been revealed! Now folks had a look at the bike and reactions were.........passionate! Folks either loved it, or slagged it off as Salsa's "rip-off" of custom bikes, or said it was a "Jones Bike clone", or they even tried to draw parallels to Niner Bikes. The commentary was goofy, sometimes extremely negative, and not one of these people had actually ever ridden one yet. I kind of felt like it was a bike that had tons of potential to bring a lot of non-racer types back into a form of cycling I briefly was calling "adventuring". Here's a bit of a snippet from 2008 on what I thought about the Fargo:

"I think that the Fargo will be a trend setter, but maybe I'm off my rocker. I do know that it is a bike a lot of folks have been waiting for. Perhaps a bike that will set off a thousand adventures? Time will tell."

Judging from the Facebook page for the Fargo and the long running Fargo thread on MTBR.com, I'd say I was right about that. The Fargo still sparks that same kind of wonder and curiosity that it did in 2008. Kudos to Jason Boucher, Joe Meiser, Kid Reimer, and all the Salsa Crew who, at that time, had the vision and the passion to bring that bicycle model to life. I and a whole bunch of other folks owe a big debt of gratitude to those people.

Minus Ten Review -36

Hard to handle, but imminently ride-able.

Ten years ago on the blog I posted what still is pretty much my thoughts on fork offset, front end geometry, and how that affects handling.

"In the end, most combinations are immanently ride able and most of us would be able to handle the bike with whatever geometry we want to consider. Whether it fits an individuals style and how a bike should handle in their mind is going to vary quite a bit from person to person. That is what I think is great about today versus five years ago. Back then, you were stuck in a box handling-wise, only being able to vary how a bike rode incrementally with a head angle change. Now you can have it spicy or mild, or anywhere in between. I love it and it opens up a whole different set of perspectives on what a good handling bike really is."

There were thoughts shared on Trans Iowa and the recon for v5. I split the course finding duties with David Pals that year. He rode a lot of his bits and eventually I was to join him in doing that for what would become v7 a couple of years later. The recon of the course in this manner was a big lifting of weight off my shoulders and I was very relieved to have David working in the capacity that he did back then. 

Finally, by this point in 2008, Salsa Cycles had introduced the Fargo. The name had been revealed! Now folks had a look at the bike and reactions were.........passionate! Folks either loved it, or slagged it off as Salsa's "rip-off" of custom bikes, or said it was a "Jones Bike clone", or they even tried to draw parallels to Niner Bikes. The commentary was goofy, sometimes extremely negative, and not one of these people had actually ever ridden one yet. I kind of felt like it was a bike that had tons of potential to bring a lot of non-racer types back into a form of cycling I briefly was calling "adventuring". Here's a bit of a snippet from 2008 on what I thought about the Fargo:

"I think that the Fargo will be a trend setter, but maybe I'm off my rocker. I do know that it is a bike a lot of folks have been waiting for. Perhaps a bike that will set off a thousand adventures? Time will tell."

Judging from the Facebook page for the Fargo and the long running Fargo thread on MTBR.com, I'd say I was right about that. The Fargo still sparks that same kind of wonder and curiosity that it did in 2008. Kudos to Jason Boucher, Joe Meiser, Kid Reimer, and all the Salsa Crew who, at that time, had the vision and the passion to bring that bicycle model to life. I and a whole bunch of other folks owe a big debt of gratitude to those people.

Minus Ten Review -34

Fork swapping continued. Here is a 420mm axle to crown fork on the Blackbuck

Ten years ago here on the blog I was talking about many things that have come to pass or have been proven to be flashes in the pan. One thing I'll share today is an example to us now that history is repeating itself.

The stage racing, ultra-distance unpaved bicycle thing was really just taking off ten years ago. While there had always been events of this ilk, the social media/internet factor wasn't present and in 2008, lots of folks were looking for something other than a criterium or mountain bike race to test their mettle. (Okay, triathlon was a part of this, but that's more than just cycling) I predicted that bicycle companies would begin to cater to this trend, and of course, you know now that has happened. I was "in the know" about what Salsa Cycles was up to, but I saw that and knew it would not stop with them.

Another thing I always was sure would happen was that 29"er wheels would supplant the then dominant standard of 26 inch wheels. 27.5"ers eventually sealed the deal on 26"ers, but it was going to happen anyway. So, I was excited for the 2008 Interbike, which I felt would help propel 29"ers into the mainstream, and you know what happened after that.

Interestingly, this was also about when Interbike, and trade shows in general, took a step backward from prominence and slowly faded into obscurity within the next five years. 2007-2008 was about when the pendulum swung back, in my estimation. Those first Interbike shows I went to for "Twenty Nine Inches" were really quite crazy busy. Not so much in the years afterward.

The Blackbuck here with a rare Willits WOW fork. I traded the fork years later for fat bike rims.

Finally, I reported on a trend ten years ago which the bicycling industry was hot on which doesn't hardly move the needle now. It is a great example of what is going on right now with e-bikes. Here's what I wrote ten years ago concerning the hot trend of "urban bikes":

"With the "trade show season" upon us, there is always speculation that something really big is going to be shown that will blow us all away. You know, "The Next Big Thing". Who knows what that will be, or even if it will be.

Last year it was "urban bikes", this year it could be that again. Commuter/urban/fixie/utility rigs that people think are going to "save the planet"."

And that trend died right after this. Where do you even see fixies being sold in the numbers they once were? Another great example is the QBP brand "All City". An urban, hipster moniker if there ever was one for a bike company. Well, they hit the scene ten years ago with a suite of fixie parts and then they came out with some crazy urban rigs. Good stuff, but the trend was dying. All City pretty much has abandoned their fixie roots for all-road and classic style cycling trends. 

All this to point out that there are many e-bike players and only so many customers. There will be a tipping point with e-bikes where the folks that have them won't be in the market anymore and over-production will rear its ugly head. Then......the inevitable. The cycling world will then be on the lookout for whatever "The Next Big Thing" is. You know,  instead of promoting a certain type of bicycle, the industry needs to promote a reason for riding, places to do that which are safe, and the rest will follow. Make it fun, authentic, and safe. Not centered around a type of bicycle.

Minus Ten Review -34

Fork swapping continued. Here is a 420mm axle to crown fork on the Blackbuck

Ten years ago here on the blog I was talking about many things that have come to pass or have been proven to be flashes in the pan. One thing I'll share today is an example to us now that history is repeating itself.

The stage racing, ultra-distance unpaved bicycle thing was really just taking off ten years ago. While there had always been events of this ilk, the social media/internet factor wasn't present and in 2008, lots of folks were looking for something other than a criterium or mountain bike race to test their mettle. (Okay, triathlon was a part of this, but that's more than just cycling) I predicted that bicycle companies would begin to cater to this trend, and of course, you know now that has happened. I was "in the know" about what Salsa Cycles was up to, but I saw that and knew it would not stop with them.

Another thing I always was sure would happen was that 29"er wheels would supplant the then dominant standard of 26 inch wheels. 27.5"ers eventually sealed the deal on 26"ers, but it was going to happen anyway. So, I was excited for the 2008 Interbike, which I felt would help propel 29"ers into the mainstream, and you know what happened after that.

Interestingly, this was also about when Interbike, and trade shows in general, took a step backward from prominence and slowly faded into obscurity within the next five years. 2007-2008 was about when the pendulum swung back, in my estimation. Those first Interbike shows I went to for "Twenty Nine Inches" were really quite crazy busy. Not so much in the years afterward.

The Blackbuck here with a rare Willits WOW fork. I traded the fork years later for fat bike rims.

Finally, I reported on a trend ten years ago which the bicycling industry was hot on which doesn't hardly move the needle now. It is a great example of what is going on right now with e-bikes. Here's what I wrote ten years ago concerning the hot trend of "urban bikes":

"With the "trade show season" upon us, there is always speculation that something really big is going to be shown that will blow us all away. You know, "The Next Big Thing". Who knows what that will be, or even if it will be.

Last year it was "urban bikes", this year it could be that again. Commuter/urban/fixie/utility rigs that people think are going to "save the planet"."

And that trend died right after this. Where do you even see fixies being sold in the numbers they once were? Another great example is the QBP brand "All City". An urban, hipster moniker if there ever was one for a bike company. Well, they hit the scene ten years ago with a suite of fixie parts and then they came out with some crazy urban rigs. Good stuff, but the trend was dying. All City pretty much has abandoned their fixie roots for all-road and classic style cycling trends. 

All this to point out that there are many e-bike players and only so many customers. There will be a tipping point with e-bikes where the folks that have them won't be in the market anymore and over-production will rear its ugly head. Then......the inevitable. The cycling world will then be on the lookout for whatever "The Next Big Thing" is. You know,  instead of promoting a certain type of bicycle, the industry needs to promote a reason for riding, places to do that which are safe, and the rest will follow. Make it fun, authentic, and safe. Not centered around a type of bicycle.

Minus Ten Review- 31

Blackbuck single speed. Still one of my favorite bicycles.

Ten years ago on the blog I was spending a lot of time testing eight different forks on my Blackbuck single speed rig.  I was doing a series to show how different fork axle to crowns and offsets all could be used on the same bicycle and how that affected handling.

It was quite an eye opener for me. In essence, I found none of the varied combinations unrideable. Unlikable? That's a different story. Of course, there were a few choices I wouldn't make, but I tried them all.

I ended up liking the combination shown here today the best, and I have that fork on that bike right now. It just looks "right" as well, with the black and polished silver bits.

I also noted that I was riding the South Side more. It wasn't easy back then to figure out where you were. Of course there was far less trail then. No "Bottoms", (I still think this section needs to be named after Paul, who created it), and there were no trails near the lodge or what used to be the COPE area. There was simply an "inner loop" and an "outer loop". The two were separated by a service road, only a portion of which still exists out there. That road basically almost circumnavigated the South Side and trails used to cross that road in a few spots. Keen eyes can still pick out where that was today.

Things were a LOT different looking out there ten years ago!

Another thing to point out is how different things were ten years ago in now familiar spots to those riding Ingawanis Woodlands. This image to the left shows that rocky outcropping as you come out of the "Bottoms" or right there where that short bypass to go around the Bottoms turns back toward the East.

Don't recognize it? Can't blame ya. There is no mossy covered limestone or vegetation coming through in that spot anymore. The "line" to get through those rocks is well defined now, but it was non-existent back in the day. I cannot tell you how many times I biffed it there in the past. Many, I know that much.

When I finally mastered that area I was proud. It was a tough little techy feature that I am glad still exists. (At least I think it does!) Anyway, it was one of the few things one could ride around here that gave you any chances of "getting skills".  Then there was "Captain Bob's Berm" which no longer exists. That was fun when it was in its prime. Too bad someone decided to level that corner out several years ago. Fun haters.........

Anyway, now we have twice the trail on the South Side, (Ingawanis Woodlands now) and it is great to be able to have that resource. It wasn't bad back ten years ago, but it wasn't as long either, or anywhere as easy to follow. Although, to this day Ingawanis ranks as one of the worst marked trails I've ever been to in the Mid-West. (Check out the Twin Cities or Sugar Bottom for some of the best) That goes for our city trails here as well. Too bad that cannot get figured out, but so it goes.....

Minus Ten Review- 31

Blackbuck single speed. Still one of my favorite bicycles.

Ten years ago on the blog I was spending a lot of time testing eight different forks on my Blackbuck single speed rig.  I was doing a series to show how different fork axle to crowns and offsets all could be used on the same bicycle and how that affected handling.

It was quite an eye opener for me. In essence, I found none of the varied combinations unrideable. Unlikable? That's a different story. Of course, there were a few choices I wouldn't make, but I tried them all.

I ended up liking the combination shown here today the best, and I have that fork on that bike right now. It just looks "right" as well, with the black and polished silver bits.

I also noted that I was riding the South Side more. It wasn't easy back then to figure out where you were. Of course there was far less trail then. No "Bottoms", (I still think this section needs to be named after Paul, who created it), and there were no trails near the lodge or what used to be the COPE area. There was simply an "inner loop" and an "outer loop". The two were separated by a service road, only a portion of which still exists out there. That road basically almost circumnavigated the South Side and trails used to cross that road in a few spots. Keen eyes can still pick out where that was today.

Things were a LOT different looking out there ten years ago!

Another thing to point out is how different things were ten years ago in now familiar spots to those riding Ingawanis Woodlands. This image to the left shows that rocky outcropping as you come out of the "Bottoms" or right there where that short bypass to go around the Bottoms turns back toward the East.

Don't recognize it? Can't blame ya. There is no mossy covered limestone or vegetation coming through in that spot anymore. The "line" to get through those rocks is well defined now, but it was non-existent back in the day. I cannot tell you how many times I biffed it there in the past. Many, I know that much.

When I finally mastered that area I was proud. It was a tough little techy feature that I am glad still exists. (At least I think it does!) Anyway, it was one of the few things one could ride around here that gave you any chances of "getting skills".  Then there was "Captain Bob's Berm" which no longer exists. That was fun when it was in its prime. Too bad someone decided to level that corner out several years ago. Fun haters.........

Anyway, now we have twice the trail on the South Side, (Ingawanis Woodlands now) and it is great to be able to have that resource. It wasn't bad back ten years ago, but it wasn't as long either, or anywhere as easy to follow. Although, to this day Ingawanis ranks as one of the worst marked trails I've ever been to in the Mid-West. (Check out the Twin Cities or Sugar Bottom for some of the best) That goes for our city trails here as well. Too bad that cannot get figured out, but so it goes.....

Minus Ten Review- 9

Since I didn't post any pictures this week ten years ago you get another look at this animal excavation.

Ten years ago this week I didn't post any pictures for the week. I know.....I know! I said that would be rare going forward. It will be. I promise.....

Anyway, ten years ago I was going on about a few things. Trans Iowa, of course, Jan Ullrich's retirement from Pro cycling, and I was ranting about the icy Winter storms we were getting then. But one thing I made some prognostications about concerned an image seen on the web forums of Travis Brown piloting a strange beast of a bike, As it turned out, it was a 29 inch wheeled front/26 inch wheeled rear bicycle which Trek eventually produced and dubbed a "69er".

One thing I did get right from that image was that Trek was experimenting with offsets for forks. In fact, they already had what they were going to do figured out. Later in the Summer Trek would release the bombshell that they had an exclusive one year deal with Fox Shox and that the new offset would be 51mm which was part of what Trek dubbed "G2 Geometry". Many folks only remember the fork offsets, but there was more to G2 than just that.

G2 geometry pretty much opened the door for what we now see as "normal" trail bike geometry. Slacker head tube angles matched up with longer fork offsets were the first step. Longer front-centers and wider bars set up with stubby stems were the next step. Matched up with the short rear-centers, these geometries and angles all are pretty much the culmination of a vision Gary Fisher had in 1999 for 29"ers.

Minus Ten Review- 9

Since I didn't post any pictures this week ten years ago you get another look at this animal excavation.

Ten years ago this week I didn't post any pictures for the week. I know.....I know! I said that would be rare going forward. It will be. I promise.....

Anyway, ten years ago I was going on about a few things. Trans Iowa, of course, Jan Ullrich's retirement from Pro cycling, and I was ranting about the icy Winter storms we were getting then. But one thing I made some prognostications about concerned an image seen on the web forums of Travis Brown piloting a strange beast of a bike, As it turned out, it was a 29 inch wheeled front/26 inch wheeled rear bicycle which Trek eventually produced and dubbed a "69er".

One thing I did get right from that image was that Trek was experimenting with offsets for forks. In fact, they already had what they were going to do figured out. Later in the Summer Trek would release the bombshell that they had an exclusive one year deal with Fox Shox and that the new offset would be 51mm which was part of what Trek dubbed "G2 Geometry". Many folks only remember the fork offsets, but there was more to G2 than just that.

G2 geometry pretty much opened the door for what we now see as "normal" trail bike geometry. Slacker head tube angles matched up with longer fork offsets were the first step. Longer front-centers and wider bars set up with stubby stems were the next step. Matched up with the short rear-centers, these geometries and angles all are pretty much the culmination of a vision Gary Fisher had in 1999 for 29"ers.

Minus Ten Review- 2

THAT trail, not "trail", get it?

Ten years ago on the blog I was talking about a wide array of things, but one topic that I covered is still sorely misunderstood ten years down the road.

You hear folks talk about how "None of this nit picking, micro-dissection of bicycles and geometry matters. Just ride!". Then you can find the same folks talking about how they really liked this demo bike they tried, or they really liked some different rig their friend has because it "felt so good to me!". "Say one thing, do another" much? Yes. Yes, many times they do .

One of these areas of misunderstanding is bicycle geometry, but there are others as well. Tires are another big one, but let's stick to the geometry for now, since that is what I was writing about ten years ago.

Front end geometry is probably one of the biggest contributors to how you perceive a bicycle handles. Rightly so, since your hands, two of five body contact points, are directly connected to the business end of front end geometry. They feel the results of what is going on with all those angles and whatnot. Yet many people fail to recognize this, or begin to understand how that can be such a big deal. Mere millimeters of difference in "trail", the measurement which describes the stability or lack thereof in a bike, can make a huge difference in your perceptions as a rider. Head tube angles are most often referenced in discussions about front end geometry, but that is really only a part of what really matters, which is the "trail" figure.

This post a decade ago ended up becoming the catalyst for an extensive experiment I ran a year later. I took my OS Bikes Blackbuck and ran eight different forks on it all with various offsets, axle to crown dimensions, and formats. (rigid and suspended) I made every effort to keep all other fit parameters the same. It was a very enlightening experience, but I'll leave that discussion for some time down the road.  

Minus Ten Review- 2

THAT trail, not "trail", get it?

Ten years ago on the blog I was talking about a wide array of things, but one topic that I covered is still sorely misunderstood ten years down the road.

You hear folks talk about how "None of this nit picking, micro-dissection of bicycles and geometry matters. Just ride!". Then you can find the same folks talking about how they really liked this demo bike they tried, or they really liked some different rig their friend has because it "felt so good to me!". "Say one thing, do another" much? Yes. Yes, many times they do .

One of these areas of misunderstanding is bicycle geometry, but there are others as well. Tires are another big one, but let's stick to the geometry for now, since that is what I was writing about ten years ago.

Front end geometry is probably one of the biggest contributors to how you perceive a bicycle handles. Rightly so, since your hands, two of five body contact points, are directly connected to the business end of front end geometry. They feel the results of what is going on with all those angles and whatnot. Yet many people fail to recognize this, or begin to understand how that can be such a big deal. Mere millimeters of difference in "trail", the measurement which describes the stability or lack thereof in a bike, can make a huge difference in your perceptions as a rider. Head tube angles are most often referenced in discussions about front end geometry, but that is really only a part of what really matters, which is the "trail" figure.

This post a decade ago ended up becoming the catalyst for an extensive experiment I ran a year later. I took my OS Bikes Blackbuck and ran eight different forks on it all with various offsets, axle to crown dimensions, and formats. (rigid and suspended) I made every effort to keep all other fit parameters the same. It was a very enlightening experience, but I'll leave that discussion for some time down the road.  

Fork Flip Friday

Maybe you don't pay attention to these sorts of things, but I do. Fork lengths on 29"er hard tails are getting longer. Used to be you went with the ol' original Reba at 80mm travel and you were all good. Then Fox got into the game with an 80mm travel fork. Okay, yippee! Manitou was there with an 80mm fork, life was good.

100mm forks were for FS rigs. Nice! Works well there. But guess what? Now all the new hard tails have 100mm forks. Ever see a 2010 with an 80mm front end? Not too many are set up that way anymore.

So it was that when Lynskey sent over this bike, it had a 100mm Fox fork up front. Nice fork and all, but the front end of the bike was so tall, that the handle bars were higher than the tops of my Fargo drop bars! Umm............'scuse me, but that's tooooo upright folks! Not only that, but the longer lever arm the 100mm fork presented was playing havoc with the front triangle of the bike. I wasn't really digging it, ya know?

So I figured that I'd try a suspension corrected for 80mm travel rigid fork, like the Salsa CroMoto Grande' Ahhhh! It is just the right spicy additive to this titanium stew! Man, the bike is just really a whole heckuva lot better than it was. Better steering, better stiffness in the front end, better seated position, better weight distribution on the front wheel, and oh yeah.................it is lighter too. 

But what about that rigid, stiff steel fork? Ya know what? Funny thing is that it rides just about as smoothly as it did before. Oh sure, big hits will rattle yer eyeballs a bit, but the frame is working now like it hasn't before because of the rigid fork. The little stuff I'm hitting feels about the same as it did before. Titanium. Nice. Smooth. I wasn't getting that so much from the front suspendedness I had going on before.

Front end lowered to a reasonable height, lighter, better steering, nice titanium feel. It's like I have a different bike to test now. Too bad I didn't swap it out earlier! It's a Twenty Nine Inches test rig, so it won't be here much longer. I just know that now I'll need to stock an 80mm travel suspension fork for these longer legged hard tails that the industry is foisting on us now. Ya know, sometimes "more" isn't really "better".

Have a great weekend and ride yer bicycles!

Fork Flip Friday

Maybe you don't pay attention to these sorts of things, but I do. Fork lengths on 29"er hard tails are getting longer. Used to be you went with the ol' original Reba at 80mm travel and you were all good. Then Fox got into the game with an 80mm travel fork. Okay, yippee! Manitou was there with an 80mm fork, life was good.

100mm forks were for FS rigs. Nice! Works well there. But guess what? Now all the new hard tails have 100mm forks. Ever see a 2010 with an 80mm front end? Not too many are set up that way anymore.

So it was that when Lynskey sent over this bike, it had a 100mm Fox fork up front. Nice fork and all, but the front end of the bike was so tall, that the handle bars were higher than the tops of my Fargo drop bars! Umm............'scuse me, but that's tooooo upright folks! Not only that, but the longer lever arm the 100mm fork presented was playing havoc with the front triangle of the bike. I wasn't really digging it, ya know?

So I figured that I'd try a suspension corrected for 80mm travel rigid fork, like the Salsa CroMoto Grande' Ahhhh! It is just the right spicy additive to this titanium stew! Man, the bike is just really a whole heckuva lot better than it was. Better steering, better stiffness in the front end, better seated position, better weight distribution on the front wheel, and oh yeah.................it is lighter too. 

But what about that rigid, stiff steel fork? Ya know what? Funny thing is that it rides just about as smoothly as it did before. Oh sure, big hits will rattle yer eyeballs a bit, but the frame is working now like it hasn't before because of the rigid fork. The little stuff I'm hitting feels about the same as it did before. Titanium. Nice. Smooth. I wasn't getting that so much from the front suspendedness I had going on before.

Front end lowered to a reasonable height, lighter, better steering, nice titanium feel. It's like I have a different bike to test now. Too bad I didn't swap it out earlier! It's a Twenty Nine Inches test rig, so it won't be here much longer. I just know that now I'll need to stock an 80mm travel suspension fork for these longer legged hard tails that the industry is foisting on us now. Ya know, sometimes "more" isn't really "better".

Have a great weekend and ride yer bicycles!

Musings On The Fork Swapping Experiment: Part III

Well this whole experiment is starting to wind down to a close now. I have the Fox F-29 with G2 offset yet to try out and then the ol' Blackbuck will get the Spinner 2Nine fork slapped up front for a longer term. I need to evaluate the Spinner fork and that will not only be the last fork in this experiment, but overlap into a review on the fork itself. Should work out if we have riding into the late Fall!

Anyway, some conclusions are being reached now that I have had the time to stew over my results. The findings are not too surprising, given my original hypothesis, which was that the "numbers" don't tell the whole story. They don't. You can not really fathom how a 29"er might handle just from a geometry table. A result of old thinking that was homogenized by years of 26"er inbred geometry figures and handling traits.

So what is the story? This shouldn't be surprising either, but I was sort of slapped upside the head with this one. Kind of a "whoa" experience where you are too focused on details and not seeing the obvious answer which is staring you right in the face the whole time. It is the wheel itself.

Yes, the nature of the 29"er wheel itself is the answer. It has a greater gyroscopic effect and causes your rig to have more stability. This in turn affects handling.(Duh! you say?) Well, what was not really understood was how much it affects handling. It colors handling in a far greater way than I thought previously. This is why a 29"er with a "ridiculous" head angle of 74 degrees with an "un-ride able" offset of 51mm can work. Not just work, but work pretty dang well.

That is why your bottom bracket height, which on one rig I rode at Interbike was something like 14 inches, doesn't really throw off handling like you might think it should. It is why Fisher's G2 handling doesn't make any sense on paper. It is the wheel folks. It does stuff to a bikes handling that smaller wheels just couldn't do.

And that is just one more reason I like 29"ers better than the smaller wheeled choices. Nothing else quite measures up.

Musings On The Fork Swapping Experiment: Part III

Well this whole experiment is starting to wind down to a close now. I have the Fox F-29 with G2 offset yet to try out and then the ol' Blackbuck will get the Spinner 2Nine fork slapped up front for a longer term. I need to evaluate the Spinner fork and that will not only be the last fork in this experiment, but overlap into a review on the fork itself. Should work out if we have riding into the late Fall!

Anyway, some conclusions are being reached now that I have had the time to stew over my results. The findings are not too surprising, given my original hypothesis, which was that the "numbers" don't tell the whole story. They don't. You can not really fathom how a 29"er might handle just from a geometry table. A result of old thinking that was homogenized by years of 26"er inbred geometry figures and handling traits.

So what is the story? This shouldn't be surprising either, but I was sort of slapped upside the head with this one. Kind of a "whoa" experience where you are too focused on details and not seeing the obvious answer which is staring you right in the face the whole time. It is the wheel itself.

Yes, the nature of the 29"er wheel itself is the answer. It has a greater gyroscopic effect and causes your rig to have more stability. This in turn affects handling.(Duh! you say?) Well, what was not really understood was how much it affects handling. It colors handling in a far greater way than I thought previously. This is why a 29"er with a "ridiculous" head angle of 74 degrees with an "un-ride able" offset of 51mm can work. Not just work, but work pretty dang well.

That is why your bottom bracket height, which on one rig I rode at Interbike was something like 14 inches, doesn't really throw off handling like you might think it should. It is why Fisher's G2 handling doesn't make any sense on paper. It is the wheel folks. It does stuff to a bikes handling that smaller wheels just couldn't do.

And that is just one more reason I like 29"ers better than the smaller wheeled choices. Nothing else quite measures up.

Musings On The Fork Swapping Experiment: Part II

<==== Could this break you out of the "box" you're in?

I'm still doing this nutty fork swapping business that I started back in July. I have posted some thoughts about the process before, but I thought I would update where my mind has been at with this now, as I get closer to drawing this experiment to a close.

First of all, this idea was a brilliant idea to get me to ride more. Really! I needed a motivation to get out and do something that excited me, not unlike some of you that race out there. Since getting to a race is pretty tough for me with my family and schedule, the fork experiment has been a great way to basically do what prepping for a big event has done for some of you.

Not only that, but my bike was a different bike every time out. Kind of like getting to ride something new every ride. This may not appeal to some of you folks that like to limit the variables, but I seem to be a bit different in that regard. Heck, I couldn't ever do the two step either. Why do the same thing over and over again when you could do the pogo and thrash all at the same time? (Yeah.....I know! I don't need to convince some of you out there that I am truly a bit odd!)

Getting back to the fork thing, I wrote this just recently on a thread on mtbr.com : "In the end, most combinations are immanently ride able and most of us would be able to handle the bike with whatever geometry we want to consider. Whether it fits an individuals style and how a bike should handle in their mind is going to vary quite a bit from person to person.

That is what I think is great about today versus five years ago. Back then, you were stuck in a box handling-wise, only being able to vary how a bike rode incrementally with a head angle change. Now you can have it spicy or mild, or anywhere in between. I love it and it opens up a whole different set of perspectives on what a good handling bike really is."
__________________

So this is what is really cool about all of this fork offset nonsense; you don't have to be stuck with a twenty nine inch wheeled bicycle that doesn't quite suit your expectations in handling. You just might be able to tweak it to squeeze out a different sort of handling than you thought possible.

Now you won't be able to do that every time, depending upon the bikes original geometry, and whether or not you prefer a suspension fork or not. However; in a lot of cases you could, and the bicycle that you have might not need to be replaced, it just might need to have its handling tuned. It is cheaper to buy a fork in most cases than an entirely new bicycle in terms of 29"ers. Don't be afraid to try it! If you are one of those that is thinking you might "screw something up" by throwing on that 46mm offset fork, don't be! Chances are you will get along with it fine, the bike will be rideable, and nothing bad will happen in your world because of this. It still will be a bicycle, and you just might like it better.

Hey, if you swap your fork out and it gets you to ride more because you really like the change, it's a good thing, no? 29"ers offer their riders that opportunity. Check it out!

Musings On The Fork Swapping Experiment: Part II

<==== Could this break you out of the "box" you're in?

I'm still doing this nutty fork swapping business that I started back in July. I have posted some thoughts about the process before, but I thought I would update where my mind has been at with this now, as I get closer to drawing this experiment to a close.

First of all, this idea was a brilliant idea to get me to ride more. Really! I needed a motivation to get out and do something that excited me, not unlike some of you that race out there. Since getting to a race is pretty tough for me with my family and schedule, the fork experiment has been a great way to basically do what prepping for a big event has done for some of you.

Not only that, but my bike was a different bike every time out. Kind of like getting to ride something new every ride. This may not appeal to some of you folks that like to limit the variables, but I seem to be a bit different in that regard. Heck, I couldn't ever do the two step either. Why do the same thing over and over again when you could do the pogo and thrash all at the same time? (Yeah.....I know! I don't need to convince some of you out there that I am truly a bit odd!)

Getting back to the fork thing, I wrote this just recently on a thread on mtbr.com : "In the end, most combinations are immanently ride able and most of us would be able to handle the bike with whatever geometry we want to consider. Whether it fits an individuals style and how a bike should handle in their mind is going to vary quite a bit from person to person.

That is what I think is great about today versus five years ago. Back then, you were stuck in a box handling-wise, only being able to vary how a bike rode incrementally with a head angle change. Now you can have it spicy or mild, or anywhere in between. I love it and it opens up a whole different set of perspectives on what a good handling bike really is."
__________________

So this is what is really cool about all of this fork offset nonsense; you don't have to be stuck with a twenty nine inch wheeled bicycle that doesn't quite suit your expectations in handling. You just might be able to tweak it to squeeze out a different sort of handling than you thought possible.

Now you won't be able to do that every time, depending upon the bikes original geometry, and whether or not you prefer a suspension fork or not. However; in a lot of cases you could, and the bicycle that you have might not need to be replaced, it just might need to have its handling tuned. It is cheaper to buy a fork in most cases than an entirely new bicycle in terms of 29"ers. Don't be afraid to try it! If you are one of those that is thinking you might "screw something up" by throwing on that 46mm offset fork, don't be! Chances are you will get along with it fine, the bike will be rideable, and nothing bad will happen in your world because of this. It still will be a bicycle, and you just might like it better.

Hey, if you swap your fork out and it gets you to ride more because you really like the change, it's a good thing, no? 29"ers offer their riders that opportunity. Check it out!