A Good, Solid Bicycle

A 1999 Surly 1X1 Frame & Fork

 Those Facebook memories posts you see when you first open that social media platform up can be jarring. "Was it THAT long ago already!" Ha ha! Sometimes it is a good thing which pops up. Sometimes not so much. Well, on Monday, the 10th of November, this image here popped up. 

I came into work at Europa Cycle and Ski, just like any other Monday, and saw this as you see it in the image. There was a note which told me the frame and fork was now under my care. The former owner, Brian Bottke, used to work for Europa. In fact, everyone who has ever owned this worked there at one time or another. (See THIS post for the story.) 

I could go on about the string of seven guys who have owned the bike, and maybe this would make for an interesting post. However; I also wanted to go to the point of this bicycle being such a practical, versatile piece that seven different people found a reason to make it their bicycle. 

I think this is pretty remarkable when you stop to consider how most bicycles are so niche and specific the string of one or two, maybe three owners a bicycle may have in its lifespan use the bike in the way it was intended to be used. The bike doesn't see a lot of variance from the main idea. However; in the case of the 1X1, it saw use cases which were vastly different during the times it was passed on from one person to another. 

Consider this: The bicycle you see above was a "grown man's BMX bike, a single speed gravel grinder training device, a commuter bike, a cargo bike with the addition of an Xtra-Cycle attachment, a fixed gear bike, and back to a commuter bicycle again.  Of course, 1X1's have been used as MTB's, "plus" bikes, and even fat bikes. Just this one singular model. 

This is amazing to me. 

Surly used to be known for this sort of thing. Many of their early models were bicycles you could bend to your own "use-will", so to speak. This has kind of disappeared in their line of late. I like a good, solid bicycle which can be purposed in several ways. I think the world needs more of just that. Not 50 variations of a 'thing' which can only do one thing. 

If you know of any bicycles which would be like the old Surlys, let me, and the rest of the readers, know in the comments.  

Roller Cams On The Brain: Update 3

The last time I wrote here concerning the old Dorado MTB with rollercam brakes I was telling you all about the snafu with regard to handlebars and the stem which prevented me from swapping things around. I also had done a wheel bearing repair on the rear wheel. 

Well, maybe you may have thought I'd forgotten all about that Winter project, and you'd have a valid thought there, except for that I did not forget about this project this time. I know.......crazy, right? 

Since that last update I found a pair of tires that would serve as a test set, a pair of brand new rim strips left over from the T.I.v5 sponsorship, and I had pilfered my Brooks B17 Special from that old barn-built Trek I have as a saddle to try out on this along with the Fyxation pedals from the same bike. I had everything lined up that I needed to reassemble this bike and see if it was going to be something I'd want to keep around.

It ain't pretty, that's for sure!

So, without further adieu, here it is. The Dorado Sherpa. Ah.........this is an ugly duckling of a bike. No doubt there were a ton of bikes out there that looked like this in the mid-80's, but now? This seems like a prehistoric anomaly. Okay, okay.....That's just my opinion, but really, just look at the thing! 

What's really odd is that this bike looks way too big for me, but it isn't. It fits like a glove. The rearward weight bias is quite notable, and while I did not have time to really mess about when I did my test ride, I feel like this could be a wheelie machine. This bike simply begs for a drop bar, if it weren't for that ancient steer tube ID. 

It may be hard to believe, but this saddle was a nice green color when new.

Everything works fine, by the way. The rollercams worked and adjusted up well. The right thumbie is actually indexed. Crazy! Shifts just like a Sun Tour bike does. (If you know - you know!) I did swap out the original rear derailleur for a newer Sun Tour XC Pro I had laying around. The original had a lower jockey wheel I could not get to work as well as I'd want it to. 

I confess I screwed up the cable routing on the down tube, but no big deal. This is merely a test. If I decide I want to live with this bike it is all coming back apart for deeper cleaning anyway. I'd like to score a drop bar stem and set this up with drop bars if I decide to keep it also. I'd have to go with bar end shifters, but I have a plethora of those sitting around, so no worries there. 

This is a mock-up and I will probably run it around here a bit. Then I'll decide what I want to do. If a stem and drop bar are found that will work, that will help swing the decision. I know I really don't want to keep it this way. Until next time.....

Roller Cams On The Brain: Update 3

The last time I wrote here concerning the old Dorado MTB with rollercam brakes I was telling you all about the snafu with regard to handlebars and the stem which prevented me from swapping things around. I also had done a wheel bearing repair on the rear wheel. 

Well, maybe you may have thought I'd forgotten all about that Winter project, and you'd have a valid thought there, except for that I did not forget about this project this time. I know.......crazy, right? 

Since that last update I found a pair of tires that would serve as a test set, a pair of brand new rim strips left over from the T.I.v5 sponsorship, and I had pilfered my Brooks B17 Special from that old barn-built Trek I have as a saddle to try out on this along with the Fyxation pedals from the same bike. I had everything lined up that I needed to reassemble this bike and see if it was going to be something I'd want to keep around.

It ain't pretty, that's for sure!

So, without further adieu, here it is. The Dorado Sherpa. Ah.........this is an ugly duckling of a bike. No doubt there were a ton of bikes out there that looked like this in the mid-80's, but now? This seems like a prehistoric anomaly. Okay, okay.....That's just my opinion, but really, just look at the thing! 

What's really odd is that this bike looks way too big for me, but it isn't. It fits like a glove. The rearward weight bias is quite notable, and while I did not have time to really mess about when I did my test ride, I feel like this could be a wheelie machine. This bike simply begs for a drop bar, if it weren't for that ancient steer tube ID. 

It may be hard to believe, but this saddle was a nice green color when new.

Everything works fine, by the way. The rollercams worked and adjusted up well. The right thumbie is actually indexed. Crazy! Shifts just like a Sun Tour bike does. (If you know - you know!) I did swap out the original rear derailleur for a newer Sun Tour XC Pro I had laying around. The original had a lower jockey wheel I could not get to work as well as I'd want it to. 

I confess I screwed up the cable routing on the down tube, but no big deal. This is merely a test. If I decide I want to live with this bike it is all coming back apart for deeper cleaning anyway. I'd like to score a drop bar stem and set this up with drop bars if I decide to keep it also. I'd have to go with bar end shifters, but I have a plethora of those sitting around, so no worries there. 

This is a mock-up and I will probably run it around here a bit. Then I'll decide what I want to do. If a stem and drop bar are found that will work, that will help swing the decision. I know I really don't want to keep it this way. Until next time.....

Roller Cams On The Brain

Roller cam brakes   (Image from a sale ad on social media)

Years ago when I started poking around on the internet, one of the rabbit holes I went down concerned flared drop bars for mountain bikes. If you decide to dive into that hole it won't take you long to find the name "Charlie Cunningham". 

Charlie was a tinkerer, a co-founder of WTB (Wilderness Trail Bikes), and had his own mountain bike frame building company with his name on the downtube. Amongst his many contributions to mountain biking, and cycling in general, Charlie developed a braking system which had better modulation and power than typical cantilever brakes of the 1980's. They had a look unlike anything else out there and were called "roller cam brakes" because they featured a triangular shaped "cam" and rollers, or little wheels, at the ends of the brake arms. 

When I saw that SunTour had licensed the design from Charlie, I started keeping an eye out for a bicycle with those brakes on it. In fact, I had one, (and still do) back in the 90's. It was a Mongoose All-Mountain Pro. It featured the "Cunningham Design" SunTour roller cam on the rear stays. Back in the 1990's, no one knew anything about these weird brakes, and so I was kind of left in the dark, besides some tantalizing tidbits I'd see from time to time in magazines, or in a WTB catalog of the day. 

So, I was fascinated with roller cam brakes from that time onward. I ended up with a bicycle that has them front and rear, (a Schwinn High Sierra), which will be featured soon here on the blog. But recently we had a "barn find" come into the Cedar Valley Bicycle Collective which had the brakes on it front and rear. What is more, this bike had the "proper" arrangement: The rear brake was under the chain stay, where it was intended to be. 

See, Charlie Cunningham thought that traditional cantilever boss design placement on the seat stay and lower on the front fork blades was inferior. This traditional placement allowed the stays and fork to bow outward under braking pressure, which represented a loss of braking efficiency. What is more, those typically spindly rear stays could also twist, further degrading braking performance. Charlie's design placed the bosses higher up on the fork blades, near the base of the Unicrown, which was a lot stronger and less prone to flexing outward. In the rear, Charlie advocated for a placement of the bosses to be on the chain stays, which were vastly stiffer and less prone to twisting than the rear seat stays were.Not every bicycle that used roller cam brakes on the rear put them on the chain stays though. Neither of my two examples have that placement.

The red arrow points to where the brake boss is on the chain stay

The roller cam brake idea caught traction, and in the years 1986, 87, and 88 roller cam brakes were a big deal on many mountain bikes with probably 1988 being the "high water mark" of the "under-the-chain stay brake" fad. 

However; riders revolted against these saying they were "mud-catchers". Many were decrying the difficulty in getting rear wheels off to repair flat tires, and their voices were heard. By 1989 rear and front cantilever brakes returned to their "proper places" on frames and the roller cam idea was relegated to WTB bikes, for the most part. They were never heard from again, especially when dual suspension bikes were developed and after 1996, when Shimano introduced the linear pull, "V" brake. WTB folded up production of roller cam brakes in the late 1990's. 

So, roller cam brakes are not often seen anymore since any bike you'd typically see these on is going to be rare, as MTB bikes weren't the big deal in the 1980's as they were in the 90's, and these examples are around 35 years old or so by now. So, when a Dorado branded bike slid into the Collective last week with these brakes, in a size I could ride, well, my brain went into hyper-drive about what I could do with it. 

I don't need this bike. However; I am so smitten by roller cam brakes that I cannot stop thinking about restoring this old, rare beast and turning it into a touring bike, or a gravel rig, or..... Who knows?! 

A little about this bike: It is a "Dorado" branded bike, which, as far as I can come up with, was a house branded MTB made for sale at Costco stores. But instead of being some cheapo, big-box type quality sled, they actually made these out of decent ChroMoly main triangles and slapped quality SunTour bits on them. I also gathered that in today's dollars, a bike like this cost about $700.00, so there probably are not too many "Dorado" bikes around anyway. 

The Bad: It needs paint. The bike sat in a barn for decades and it got pretty scratched up. The wheels need redone, and the cables, housings, and that sort of stuff is needing attention.

The Good: the roller cam brakes are intact, work, and the drive train is also intact with SunTour top mount friction shifters also intact. And....it would fit me like a glove. I took some basic measurement and not only is the saddle already at my optimum height, the top tube is perfect. It has a 9" long head tube, so I could even put drop bars on this.

What Will I do: Don't know yet..... Stay tuned, but I may just salvage the brakes and bits and keep them for spares for my two other roller cam bikes. OR- I may build this up and replace my current 'townie'. Again- I don't need another bike! 

Note: Charlie Cunningham is still alive and has fallen on some difficult times in terms of health. If you are so led, here is a link to a fundraiser to help with his medical bills and recovery costs.

Roller Cams On The Brain

Roller cam brakes   (Image from a sale ad on social media)

Years ago when I started poking around on the internet, one of the rabbit holes I went down concerned flared drop bars for mountain bikes. If you decide to dive into that hole it won't take you long to find the name "Charlie Cunningham". 

Charlie was a tinkerer, a co-founder of WTB (Wilderness Trail Bikes), and had his own mountain bike frame building company with his name on the downtube. Amongst his many contributions to mountain biking, and cycling in general, Charlie developed a braking system which had better modulation and power than typical cantilever brakes of the 1980's. They had a look unlike anything else out there and were called "roller cam brakes" because they featured a triangular shaped "cam" and rollers, or little wheels, at the ends of the brake arms. 

When I saw that SunTour had licensed the design from Charlie, I started keeping an eye out for a bicycle with those brakes on it. In fact, I had one, (and still do) back in the 90's. It was a Mongoose All-Mountain Pro. It featured the "Cunningham Design" SunTour roller cam on the rear stays. Back in the 1990's, no one knew anything about these weird brakes, and so I was kind of left in the dark, besides some tantalizing tidbits I'd see from time to time in magazines, or in a WTB catalog of the day. 

So, I was fascinated with roller cam brakes from that time onward. I ended up with a bicycle that has them front and rear, (a Schwinn High Sierra), which will be featured soon here on the blog. But recently we had a "barn find" come into the Cedar Valley Bicycle Collective which had the brakes on it front and rear. What is more, this bike had the "proper" arrangement: The rear brake was under the chain stay, where it was intended to be. 

See, Charlie Cunningham thought that traditional cantilever boss design placement on the seat stay and lower on the front fork blades was inferior. This traditional placement allowed the stays and fork to bow outward under braking pressure, which represented a loss of braking efficiency. What is more, those typically spindly rear stays could also twist, further degrading braking performance. Charlie's design placed the bosses higher up on the fork blades, near the base of the Unicrown, which was a lot stronger and less prone to flexing outward. In the rear, Charlie advocated for a placement of the bosses to be on the chain stays, which were vastly stiffer and less prone to twisting than the rear seat stays were.Not every bicycle that used roller cam brakes on the rear put them on the chain stays though. Neither of my two examples have that placement.

The red arrow points to where the brake boss is on the chain stay

The roller cam brake idea caught traction, and in the years 1986, 87, and 88 roller cam brakes were a big deal on many mountain bikes with probably 1988 being the "high water mark" of the "under-the-chain stay brake" fad. 

However; riders revolted against these saying they were "mud-catchers". Many were decrying the difficulty in getting rear wheels off to repair flat tires, and their voices were heard. By 1989 rear and front cantilever brakes returned to their "proper places" on frames and the roller cam idea was relegated to WTB bikes, for the most part. They were never heard from again, especially when dual suspension bikes were developed and after 1996, when Shimano introduced the linear pull, "V" brake. WTB folded up production of roller cam brakes in the late 1990's. 

So, roller cam brakes are not often seen anymore since any bike you'd typically see these on is going to be rare, as MTB bikes weren't the big deal in the 1980's as they were in the 90's, and these examples are around 35 years old or so by now. So, when a Dorado branded bike slid into the Collective last week with these brakes, in a size I could ride, well, my brain went into hyper-drive about what I could do with it. 

I don't need this bike. However; I am so smitten by roller cam brakes that I cannot stop thinking about restoring this old, rare beast and turning it into a touring bike, or a gravel rig, or..... Who knows?! 

A little about this bike: It is a "Dorado" branded bike, which, as far as I can come up with, was a house branded MTB made for sale at Costco stores. But instead of being some cheapo, big-box type quality sled, they actually made these out of decent ChroMoly main triangles and slapped quality SunTour bits on them. I also gathered that in today's dollars, a bike like this cost about $700.00, so there probably are not too many "Dorado" bikes around anyway. 

The Bad: It needs paint. The bike sat in a barn for decades and it got pretty scratched up. The wheels need redone, and the cables, housings, and that sort of stuff is needing attention.

The Good: the roller cam brakes are intact, work, and the drive train is also intact with SunTour top mount friction shifters also intact. And....it would fit me like a glove. I took some basic measurement and not only is the saddle already at my optimum height, the top tube is perfect. It has a 9" long head tube, so I could even put drop bars on this.

What Will I do: Don't know yet..... Stay tuned, but I may just salvage the brakes and bits and keep them for spares for my two other roller cam bikes. OR- I may build this up and replace my current 'townie'. Again- I don't need another bike! 

Note: Charlie Cunningham is still alive and has fallen on some difficult times in terms of health. If you are so led, here is a link to a fundraiser to help with his medical bills and recovery costs.

Playing The Long-Game In Cycling Gear

 I read a lovely article about sustainable choices for cycling gear and kit from 'cyclingnews.com' which you can check out here, if you like. It's titled "Buy it for life cycling tech - The antidote to Black Friday". The article was endearing to me, and this made me step back and think about why that article tickled my sensibilities so. 

When it comes to a lot of things surrounding "sustainable" gear, I think much of that thought is tied directly to what bicycle mechanics see come through their work stands. It doesn't take very long for a mechanic, or any service person, for that matter, to understand the difference between marketing hype, the desire to own the "shiny new thing", and what actually is reliable, long-lasting, sensible kit. 

Call it being a "retro-grouch", or "old school", and if you do, it is usually with a sneer and disdain for the individual who uses things that seem outdated or backward. Heaven help the person who actually promotes said gear, as they will be likened to some crazy old prophet who should just go away, or worse, be stoned, for their opinions on such matters. But is using old technology a bad decision? Not if you use it for reasons of durability, ease of use, ease of maintenance, or other prudent, practical reasons. 

And using such stuff really plays into the whole "bicycling is good for the planet" theme. A thought which most cyclists probably subscribe to, since much of this sort of cycling kit is long-lasting. Certain components and gear don't require being completely replaced because of sustainable design, and therefore such things put much less pressure on our resources when we choose to use them. 

And of course, there are some new things which fall into this category. I think that article I read mentioned in the first paragraph above did a great job of featuring some newer technology. For example, the disc brakes and modern design messenger bags, but I would also go further than that. Following is just one example of many, I am sure, which could be put forth.

A smartly designed set of carbon disc brake wheels should last for a decade-plus.

While it may seem that carbon rimmed, disc brake wheels would not be on the list of things that would fall into the sustainable cycling gear category, they actually can be something that lasts for a very long term. 

Again, they have to have serviceable hubs, readily available spokes, and smart design. I think a wheel set like the GRX Carbon wheels I am reviewing for RidingGravel.com now are just such a wheel set. They have serviceable cup and cone bearings, spokes made of steel that are readily replaceable, and the rim is smartly designed. I see no reason why a person could not ride these for a decade or more. 

Dead-reliable. Super-low maintenance.

That said, many of the older steel framed, friction shifted, basic bicycles are game for this longer view of cycling sustainably. These sorts of bicycles will be around longer than any of your newer electrified bikes, 12 speed carbon wonder bikes, or anything with electronically shifted derailleurs. 

But these are not very fashionable choices, are they? These bicycles won't likely get you noticed, have any rear-rack social status, or be pawns in conversations meant to impress others. No one cares about my 1986 vintage Schwinn High Sierra. But it just works. Friction shifted, roller cam brakes, leather saddle, and even older Mongoose wheels from 1984! 

The bicycle industry really doesn't seem to want this trend to take off either. The industry seems conflicted. They "plan obsolescence" on one hand (increasing gear count, electrification) and preach the benefits to the planet and to human health from cycling on the other hand. Sustainable kit doesn't make money as fast and in such quantities if you choose to use it. The cycling industry would rather have you feel that "my bike is old" and there are new, shiny 2023 bikes to look at. The idea is formed that "you really need to have THIS to do it faster!" This thing is LIGHTER! You can do those things with more ease than ever! 

And sometimes these things are necessary, good, and make it so more people can ride bicycles. That's cool. But there is a place for sustainability and practicality within all of that which gets pushed back and ignored by much of the cycling community. This is not healthy or a good use of resources.

It is a rebellious thought to reject the marketing strategies of the day. "Black Friday" and all that it stands for is at odds with "what works", is sustainable, and is reliable in terms of cycling kit. In the end, you do you. I happen to believe in a more sustainable outlook on cycling. Call it "buying for life" or just smart. Call it being dumb, being a retro-grouch, or backwards for the sake of being contrary, (I may resemble that last one a bit, actually!), but I think we could do with a bit more of it in the cycling world.

Playing The Long-Game In Cycling Gear

 I read a lovely article about sustainable choices for cycling gear and kit from 'cyclingnews.com' which you can check out here, if you like. It's titled "Buy it for life cycling tech - The antidote to Black Friday". The article was endearing to me, and this made me step back and think about why that article tickled my sensibilities so. 

When it comes to a lot of things surrounding "sustainable" gear, I think much of that thought is tied directly to what bicycle mechanics see come through their work stands. It doesn't take very long for a mechanic, or any service person, for that matter, to understand the difference between marketing hype, the desire to own the "shiny new thing", and what actually is reliable, long-lasting, sensible kit. 

Call it being a "retro-grouch", or "old school", and if you do, it is usually with a sneer and disdain for the individual who uses things that seem outdated or backward. Heaven help the person who actually promotes said gear, as they will be likened to some crazy old prophet who should just go away, or worse, be stoned, for their opinions on such matters. But is using old technology a bad decision? Not if you use it for reasons of durability, ease of use, ease of maintenance, or other prudent, practical reasons. 

And using such stuff really plays into the whole "bicycling is good for the planet" theme. A thought which most cyclists probably subscribe to, since much of this sort of cycling kit is long-lasting. Certain components and gear don't require being completely replaced because of sustainable design, and therefore such things put much less pressure on our resources when we choose to use them. 

And of course, there are some new things which fall into this category. I think that article I read mentioned in the first paragraph above did a great job of featuring some newer technology. For example, the disc brakes and modern design messenger bags, but I would also go further than that. Following is just one example of many, I am sure, which could be put forth.

A smartly designed set of carbon disc brake wheels should last for a decade-plus.

While it may seem that carbon rimmed, disc brake wheels would not be on the list of things that would fall into the sustainable cycling gear category, they actually can be something that lasts for a very long term. 

Again, they have to have serviceable hubs, readily available spokes, and smart design. I think a wheel set like the GRX Carbon wheels I am reviewing for RidingGravel.com now are just such a wheel set. They have serviceable cup and cone bearings, spokes made of steel that are readily replaceable, and the rim is smartly designed. I see no reason why a person could not ride these for a decade or more. 

Dead-reliable. Super-low maintenance.

That said, many of the older steel framed, friction shifted, basic bicycles are game for this longer view of cycling sustainably. These sorts of bicycles will be around longer than any of your newer electrified bikes, 12 speed carbon wonder bikes, or anything with electronically shifted derailleurs. 

But these are not very fashionable choices, are they? These bicycles won't likely get you noticed, have any rear-rack social status, or be pawns in conversations meant to impress others. No one cares about my 1986 vintage Schwinn High Sierra. But it just works. Friction shifted, roller cam brakes, leather saddle, and even older Mongoose wheels from 1984! 

The bicycle industry really doesn't seem to want this trend to take off either. The industry seems conflicted. They "plan obsolescence" on one hand (increasing gear count, electrification) and preach the benefits to the planet and to human health from cycling on the other hand. Sustainable kit doesn't make money as fast and in such quantities if you choose to use it. The cycling industry would rather have you feel that "my bike is old" and there are new, shiny 2023 bikes to look at. The idea is formed that "you really need to have THIS to do it faster!" This thing is LIGHTER! You can do those things with more ease than ever! 

And sometimes these things are necessary, good, and make it so more people can ride bicycles. That's cool. But there is a place for sustainability and practicality within all of that which gets pushed back and ignored by much of the cycling community. This is not healthy or a good use of resources.

It is a rebellious thought to reject the marketing strategies of the day. "Black Friday" and all that it stands for is at odds with "what works", is sustainable, and is reliable in terms of cycling kit. In the end, you do you. I happen to believe in a more sustainable outlook on cycling. Call it "buying for life" or just smart. Call it being dumb, being a retro-grouch, or backwards for the sake of being contrary, (I may resemble that last one a bit, actually!), but I think we could do with a bit more of it in the cycling world.

Remembering The Old School

Back in the day, this was my bike. Really!

I was up at the shop yesterday to bail out a customer that needed a special cassette built up from something he had brought in. While I was assembling that, I noticed a Surly Ogre, (yeah......hard NOT to notice that box!), and it needed assembling. So I stayed and started piecing it together.

I was twiddling wrenches when I looked up and saw a "customer" approaching the counter. Suddenly I recognized the figure as a person I hadn't seen in 18 years! It was an old riding buddy of mine. What an awesome surprise.

Well, it didn't take long before we were deep into the "old daze" when we both did a lot of riding together. Trips, night time rides, and after work jaunts in Geo Wyth. For a brief look at one adventure I wrote up a few years back, see here. Those night rides were actually instigated by this old friend, which is something I just learned yesterday. It was really fun to remember those times when riding was just for fun and adventure and mountain biking was still evolving at a breakneck pace.

It's funny to look back on it all now. In some ways, the whole suspension, free ride, and racing deal back then kind of messed up what was simply a great time. We didn't let it get to us, well......not too much. But as with anything, things change and we all went our different ways. It's all good......

It was great to reconnect after all these years and catch up, and who knows, maybe someday we'll be rolling wheels together again on another adventure.

Remembering The Old School

Back in the day, this was my bike. Really!

I was up at the shop yesterday to bail out a customer that needed a special cassette built up from something he had brought in. While I was assembling that, I noticed a Surly Ogre, (yeah......hard NOT to notice that box!), and it needed assembling. So I stayed and started piecing it together.

I was twiddling wrenches when I looked up and saw a "customer" approaching the counter. Suddenly I recognized the figure as a person I hadn't seen in 18 years! It was an old riding buddy of mine. What an awesome surprise.

Well, it didn't take long before we were deep into the "old daze" when we both did a lot of riding together. Trips, night time rides, and after work jaunts in Geo Wyth. For a brief look at one adventure I wrote up a few years back, see here. Those night rides were actually instigated by this old friend, which is something I just learned yesterday. It was really fun to remember those times when riding was just for fun and adventure and mountain biking was still evolving at a breakneck pace.

It's funny to look back on it all now. In some ways, the whole suspension, free ride, and racing deal back then kind of messed up what was simply a great time. We didn't let it get to us, well......not too much. But as with anything, things change and we all went our different ways. It's all good......

It was great to reconnect after all these years and catch up, and who knows, maybe someday we'll be rolling wheels together again on another adventure.

They Don't Make 'Em Like They Used To

Have you ever wondered why it was that your old bike when you were a kid hardly ever needed air in the tires? Have you noticed lately that tubes for bicycles, (that is- if you still use tubes), are seemingly smaller than you remember? There's a reason for all of that.

First of all, tires were a lot heavier than they are today. No......a lot heavier as in waaaay more than you think. We get to repair a lot of bicycles at the shop where I work, and there are a lot of oldies being drug out of the woodwork. Not 70's bikes either, I'm talking about 1960's and previous stuff, like this Carlisle tire I have pictured here.

There is an order of magnitude to how much lighter things have gotten in the past 40-50 years in regard to many of the bicycles average folk use. The first level was achieved when we got the "lightweight" bike boom in the 70's. Remember Schwinn Continentals and Varsitys? Yes, they were "lightweights" for the day. The 80's and 90's came and things got even lighter, but that's another story, and I think you get the picture here.

The point I am trying to make is that the heavier tires didn't leak air as fast as the lighter, thinner tires of today. Then there are the tubes that go inside of these tires. Once American Made, they are also much lighter and thinner than before.

Old tube on the left...

The Carlisle tire had its original 26" X 2.125" tube inside of it. For fun, I compared it to what goes for a 26" X 2.125" tube today. See anything different here?

There is more rubber in that old tube than there is in the replacement tire I put on the old rim! The wall thickness of this old tube is just about akin to what the thicker part of a thorn-proof tube has for rubber. Obviously, what passed for 2.125" in the 50's and 60's is not what we have for that measurement today. (Gee....I wonder if my old elementary school rulers were actually longer too?)

The combination of really heavy, thick tire and really heavy thick tube resulted in a product that obviously weighed far more than similar combinations today, took more effort to ride, and had far worse rolling resistance than modern tires and tubes. The upside here was that stuff lasted forever, (to wit: This tire and tube could still feasibly be ridden), and you hardly ever had flats or needed to maintain air pressure. Bad ride quality, more effort to pedal, but dad-gummit, that stuff lasted fer-ever, and I never had ta put air in them thar tires neither!

Oh how the times have changed!

They Don't Make 'Em Like They Used To

Have you ever wondered why it was that your old bike when you were a kid hardly ever needed air in the tires? Have you noticed lately that tubes for bicycles, (that is- if you still use tubes), are seemingly smaller than you remember? There's a reason for all of that.

First of all, tires were a lot heavier than they are today. No......a lot heavier as in waaaay more than you think. We get to repair a lot of bicycles at the shop where I work, and there are a lot of oldies being drug out of the woodwork. Not 70's bikes either, I'm talking about 1960's and previous stuff, like this Carlisle tire I have pictured here.

There is an order of magnitude to how much lighter things have gotten in the past 40-50 years in regard to many of the bicycles average folk use. The first level was achieved when we got the "lightweight" bike boom in the 70's. Remember Schwinn Continentals and Varsitys? Yes, they were "lightweights" for the day. The 80's and 90's came and things got even lighter, but that's another story, and I think you get the picture here.

The point I am trying to make is that the heavier tires didn't leak air as fast as the lighter, thinner tires of today. Then there are the tubes that go inside of these tires. Once American Made, they are also much lighter and thinner than before.

Old tube on the left...

The Carlisle tire had its original 26" X 2.125" tube inside of it. For fun, I compared it to what goes for a 26" X 2.125" tube today. See anything different here?

There is more rubber in that old tube than there is in the replacement tire I put on the old rim! The wall thickness of this old tube is just about akin to what the thicker part of a thorn-proof tube has for rubber. Obviously, what passed for 2.125" in the 50's and 60's is not what we have for that measurement today. (Gee....I wonder if my old elementary school rulers were actually longer too?)

The combination of really heavy, thick tire and really heavy thick tube resulted in a product that obviously weighed far more than similar combinations today, took more effort to ride, and had far worse rolling resistance than modern tires and tubes. The upside here was that stuff lasted forever, (to wit: This tire and tube could still feasibly be ridden), and you hardly ever had flats or needed to maintain air pressure. Bad ride quality, more effort to pedal, but dad-gummit, that stuff lasted fer-ever, and I never had ta put air in them thar tires neither!

Oh how the times have changed!

What's In The Stand

Back in the 70's there was a phenomenon called the "Great Bicycle Boom". Scads of citizens were becoming more conscious about fitness. Running and cycling were becoming extremely popular. Getting bicycles out into the public's hands was done through all sorts of channels. Hardware stores, traditional bicycle shops, and even gas stations were selling bicycles back then. The major catalog stores of the time: Sears, J.C. Penney's, and Montgomery Ward's were also selling bicycles. This one here is a J.C.Penney's rig. A five speed urban bike. (And maybe you thought urban bikes were something new? No, they were very popular then as well.)

This particular bicycle is approximately from the earlier part of the 70's. Even for that time, this bike was using an antiquated type of rear derailleur that works pretty well, actually. It uses a "dual pull" cable set up where the ends of the cable both terminate at the rear derailleur. Look closely at the rear of the mech here and you can see two cables entering. Now look below the "w" embossed on the parallelogram. There you can see the clamp that secures both ends of the cable.

Here is the underside of the shifter. The entire grip rotates to initiate shifts, much like a motorcycle throttle. I didn't crack open the housing, but I assume the mechanism pulls cable in either direction by some means. The screw at the bottom adjusts the friction feel of the shifter.

The shifter worked flawlessly and the feel is much like a down tube friction shifter. Of course, being a city bike, having the entire grip rotate isn't a performance issue like it might be on a mountain bike.

Here is a look at the cable entry points on the crusty looking derailleur. Two adjuster barrels, and the left part of the cable makes a near 90 degree bend over to the right there where both ends of the cable terminate.


Because there are two cables running the show, there is no spring in the parallelogram of the rear mech. You don't have to rely on a spring to pull the cable back through some potentially contaminated housings. It actually is a pretty cool idea for an urban commuter rig that is reliable in all sorts of conditions.

Not to mention the five speed rear freewheel and beefy chain, which would take nigh unto forever to wear out.

By the way, this bike worked perfectly well. I'm sure its owner will enjoy the upright seated position, and the smooth ride.

What's In The Stand

Back in the 70's there was a phenomenon called the "Great Bicycle Boom". Scads of citizens were becoming more conscious about fitness. Running and cycling were becoming extremely popular. Getting bicycles out into the public's hands was done through all sorts of channels. Hardware stores, traditional bicycle shops, and even gas stations were selling bicycles back then. The major catalog stores of the time: Sears, J.C. Penney's, and Montgomery Ward's were also selling bicycles. This one here is a J.C.Penney's rig. A five speed urban bike. (And maybe you thought urban bikes were something new? No, they were very popular then as well.)

This particular bicycle is approximately from the earlier part of the 70's. Even for that time, this bike was using an antiquated type of rear derailleur that works pretty well, actually. It uses a "dual pull" cable set up where the ends of the cable both terminate at the rear derailleur. Look closely at the rear of the mech here and you can see two cables entering. Now look below the "w" embossed on the parallelogram. There you can see the clamp that secures both ends of the cable.

Here is the underside of the shifter. The entire grip rotates to initiate shifts, much like a motorcycle throttle. I didn't crack open the housing, but I assume the mechanism pulls cable in either direction by some means. The screw at the bottom adjusts the friction feel of the shifter.

The shifter worked flawlessly and the feel is much like a down tube friction shifter. Of course, being a city bike, having the entire grip rotate isn't a performance issue like it might be on a mountain bike.

Here is a look at the cable entry points on the crusty looking derailleur. Two adjuster barrels, and the left part of the cable makes a near 90 degree bend over to the right there where both ends of the cable terminate.


Because there are two cables running the show, there is no spring in the parallelogram of the rear mech. You don't have to rely on a spring to pull the cable back through some potentially contaminated housings. It actually is a pretty cool idea for an urban commuter rig that is reliable in all sorts of conditions.

Not to mention the five speed rear freewheel and beefy chain, which would take nigh unto forever to wear out.

By the way, this bike worked perfectly well. I'm sure its owner will enjoy the upright seated position, and the smooth ride.