Post Race!

[Witis]

The one thing I prefer about internet explorer over firefox is that in IE you can use Alt + S to submit a quick reply

Are you saying that internet explorer is better than firefox? I have to ask as I don't actually use firefox.

[Witis]

Your bug has moved.

Does that means his spidey sense is tingling?

[Witis]

I didn't intend to be here this week, or the next couple, but it didn't work out the way I wanted. I set off on a 1000 mile cross-country bike ride, but yesterday afternoon, six days and a few hundred miles into it, I was faced with the inescapable realization that I didn't believe the bike was going to survive the trip.

For example, I didn't realize that a steep mountain road descent, where speed isn't an option (too windy, too rough), will put such heat on the rims that the tubes would melt using caliper brakes. So, I need to switch over to disc brakes, probably with oversized rotors, to handle the heat stress of such a heavily loaded bike on some of the nasty hills I'll encounter. There are a few other changes that will have to be made, as well, but I've lost my window of time, so I'll finish that trip next summer and do something else this summer

When I first read about your caliper brakes melting the tubes and having to switch to disc brakes with oversized rotors I wondered how much you weigh before realising that you must be carrying all of your camping equipment and food too (some long distance riders have support vehicles to carry their luggage from campsite to campsite each night). What mods are you going to make to your bike for it to handle the extra weight and go the distance, and how many days does it take to ride 1000 miles?

[Shaggy Hiker]

I'm not a small guy to begin with, but the bike was pretty doggone heavy. Generally, my backpack is pretty much ultralight, with a base weight of around 17 pounds (minus food and water). I wasn't carrying all that much food either, though some of it was heavier than I would carry hiking. However, I was carrying a Surface Pro, a battery, and a solar charging system, along with a couple pounds of chargers for different electronics. It all added up. The bike panniers are heavier than my pack, anyways, so even that was heavier. The total weight, including about two quarts of water, was certainly over 300 lbs, though probably not far over.

A supported ride would be sweet, but it would also be cheating. Fortunately, being on roads the whole way (or so I thought, but Google took me down a road that has been closed for at least a decade, based on the vegetation growth...it was an awesome part of the ride), I ended up encountering stores, motels, or some other establishment every other day. That was about to end, though I'd still hit a town of some sort every third or fourth day.

I was planning on about 45 miles per day, which was sometimes simple, sometimes not. There were a few mountains in the way. I felt pretty good going over them, though those dirt/sand/rock jeep trails could be terribly steep, and I had to rest a fair amount. Unfortunately, due to the heat issue, downhill was possibly slower than the uphill in the steep stretches. As for modding the bike, there may not be all that much to do. The frame seemed to handle the weight without issue. The brakes couldn't hold back the weight, so moving to discs with oversized rotors will help a lot. the other system that took a lot of strain was the chain and gears. I'll take the bike in next week to see if I stretched the chain. If I did, then I'll have to plan on replacing the chain somewhere along the ride. There's a whole lot of force on that chain when hauling that load up a steep hill.

One fun thing that happened was that, on the second morning, my bike computer changed over to Dutch and I couldn't change it back. It said it was showing KM, but the distance was clearly miles. It appeared accurate, despite being a bit confused.

[Shaggy Hiker]

Are you saying that internet explorer is better than firefox? I have to ask as I don't actually use firefox.

Don't ask that. It's like saying that .NET is better than VB6: It just opens up a new religious war.

[Witis]

UCI (Union Cycliste Internationale) regulations limit a racing bike to about 15 pounds, so it's no wonder that at 300 pounds your bike was starting to suffer and I can envision that it would have been quite a strain climbing any sort of serious ascent. I have been on a supported ride over a similar distance and I don't imagine I would have liked it as much if you told me I had to ride a 300 pound bike the whole way. I wouldn't call supported rides cheating, we still had to ride the whole distance, and even the La Tour de France is a supported ride, although it probably doesn't have the same degree of difficulty or sense of accomplishment at the end. However, unless you have done lots of training riding a bike that heavy can be extremely income taxing and could even put a lot of folks off cycling ever again. I would likely recommend starting with a supported ride and then progressing to unsupported rides for experts although you still have to watch out for tractors every now and again.

Google took you down a road that had been closed for a decade. That's classic. It also happened to a guy I knew who used google maps to get directions for a flat he was going to rent. It seems they don't always keep the maps perfectly up to date. I remember from my ride that when I was anywhere near civilization it was always enjoyable to stop for some food and soft drink after about 3 or 4 hours riding, and because you are riding for so many hours every day it means that you can eat just about anything you want, except cows and chickens of course.

45 miles (72 km) a day is a decent distance per day, I remember cycling about an average of 62 miles (100 km) per day as it was quite a mountainous and spectacular route. I used to ride my racer about 18 miles/h (30 km/h) over typical terrain so 45 miles would take me about 2-3 hours of riding per day - that speed does not include long uphill sections sometimes lasting several days, although I have no idea how long it would take to cover that distance carrying an extra 285 pounds of kit. I would never ride my racer on a dirt track, are you using a mountain bike? Going up steep hills can literally create a constant stream of sweat dripping off my nose, going downhill is usually fun and refreshing rather than scary unless you need to upgrade to disc brakes to stop your rims from overheating and your tubes from blowing out.

When you add 280 pounds to a racer or a mountain bike as far as I am aware you are moving into uncharted territory, some folks attach panniers to ride to work, but they are just not designed to carry that sort of weight plus a rider or about 500 pounds (226 kg) in total. Anything could break. The frame, the wheels, the cranks, the bottom bracket, the headset, the brakes, the chain, and the gears could all potentially fail or wear out at a massively accelerated rate. Even so bicycles are usually over engineered to cope with heavy riders, unlike the bike that guy who tried to set the world gravel speed record was riding down a volcano in Nicaragua:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Éric_Barone.
Perhaps there are specialised touring bikes that you can buy?

And your cycle computer went all International Court of Justice on you, how weird.

[Witis]

Don't ask that. It's like saying that .NET is better than VB6: It just opens up a new religious war.

I just looked it up, turns out it is made by a company called Mozilla, the -zilla suffix ensured that the logo/mascot had to be godzilla:

[Shaggy Hiker]

UCI (Union Cycliste Internationale) regulations limit a racing bike to about 15 pounds, so it's no wonder that at 300 pounds your bike was starting to suffer and I can envision that it would have been quite a strain climbing any sort of serious ascent. I have been on a supported ride over a similar distance and I don't imagine I would have liked it as much if you told me I had to ride a 300 pound bike the whole way.

Going into it, I would have said the same thing. I was amazed to find that I really couldn't tell the difference between the loaded bike and the unloaded bike. The heavier bike certainly pushed me on downhills. I could tell that because I occasionally would walk down parts of steep hills to let the rims cool, and the weight of the bike was pushing me during those walks, so it was clearly there, but the impact on riding was otherwise FAR less than I would have expected. I didn't noticeably labor more going up climbs, though it makes sense that I must have been working harder.

Of course, keep in mind that when you talk about a racing bike weighing 15 lbs, and comparing it to my 300 lb bike, you have to remember that the 15 lbs doesn't include the rider, whereas 240 of the 300 lbs was me. My backpacking base load is 17 lbs, add in about 4 lbs of water, another 4-10 lbs of food (depending on the day), some 7 lbs of electronics, and the weight of the bike, which was a mountain bike, not an ultralight racing bike, and the total was probably over 300 lbs.
I wouldn't call supported rides cheating, we still had to ride the whole distance, and even the La Tour de France is a supported ride, although it probably doesn't have the same degree of difficulty or sense of accomplishment at the end. However, unless you have done lots of training riding a bike that heavy can be extremely income taxing and could even put a lot of folks off cycling ever again. I would likely recommend starting with a supported ride and then progressing to unsupported rides for experts although you still have to watch out for tractors every now and again.

I remember from my ride that when I was anywhere near civilization it was always enjoyable to stop for some food and soft drink after about 3 or 4 hours riding, and because you are riding for so many hours every day it means that you can eat just about anything you want, except cows and chickens of course.

Yeah, I totally love that about those trips. I did run into lots of cows, too. Generally, they were freaked out by me...but then I encountered one that wasn't, and realized it was a bull standing on the side of the road staring me down. It was a bit of a standoff, until all the cows and calves had departed, at which point he began to amble away a little. No fences out there, either.

45 miles (72 km) a day is a decent distance per day, I remember cycling about an average of 62 miles (100 km) per day as it was quite a mountainous and spectacular route. I used to ride my racer about 18 miles/h (30 km/h) over typical terrain so 45 miles would take me about 2-3 hours of riding per day

Pavement riding is vastly faster than mountain jeep tracks. My commute to the office is about 54 miles/day (27 each way), and I average about 15 mph on that, which includes plenty of lights and other stops. I was hoping to average 10 mph on the mountain roads, but found that it was closer to 6 mph due to various things. It's all gravel, and on those roads, making steep climbs is no big deal. There were plenty of grades you won't find on most paved routes. Some of it was so rough that it was pretty much ATV and motorcycle only. Some terrible soft sand stretches, too.

[dclamp]

Shaggy, I want to hear more about your ride. Can you post in a new thread?

[Witis]

Of course, keep in mind that when you talk about a racing bike weighing 15 lbs, and comparing it to my 300 lb bike, you have to remember that the 15 lbs doesn't include the rider, whereas 240 of the 300 lbs was me.

Ah that's different, so your kit only weighs 40 pound (18kg), that's not that much extra to carry, I mean it would cause some extra stress getting up the steep hills but it wouldn't completely kill the enjoyment of the ride. As that is only a small amount relative to you body weight I can sort of see where your cheating comment is coming from. Although my idea of cheating goes a bit more like that:

I did run into lots of cows, too. Generally, they were freaked out by me...but then I encountered one that wasn't, and realized it was a bull standing on the side of the road staring me down. It was a bit of a standoff, until all the cows and calves had departed, at which point he began to amble away a little. No fences out there, either.

You have to be careful around bulls, sometimes they can sense your intentions regarding their species, and I bet it wouldn't tickle if he charged at you.

Pavement riding is vastly faster than mountain jeep tracks. My commute to the office is about 54 miles/day (27 each way), and I average about 15 mph on that, which includes plenty of lights and other stops. I was hoping to average 10 mph on the mountain roads, but found that it was closer to 6 mph due to various things. It's all gravel, and on those roads, making steep climbs is no big deal. There were plenty of grades you won't find on most paved routes. Some of it was so rough that it was pretty much ATV and motorcycle only. Some terrible soft sand stretches, too.

Riding in deep gravel and up steep inclines with a heavy bike sounds about as much fun as trying to run in the sand with a heavy backpack on, but with the right tires and pressure, and gear choice it probably isn't.

[Shaggy Hiker]

The wildcard in the weight is the bike itself. Being a mountain bike, it will be heavier than a touring bike. I just don't know how MUCH heavier. I probably ought to weight the WHOLE kit (bike included). I think that around 40 lbs of weight on the bike is probably about right, but there are factors that could mean that it would be quite a bit heavier. Not more than 60 at the top end, and possibly even lower than 40. The bike itself can't be less than 20, and is probably a fair amount heavier than that. I really didn't want to know.

What mattered was how the handling was, and the handling was remarkably easy. Of course, when you look at the physics of the thing, the weight is not carried by me at all. When the bike is not moving, I am carrying 0 extra pounds due to the weight of the bike. When I am pedaling, I am moving the bike forwards, and that will be impacted by the weight in the amount of energy needed to move the bike, and in any wind resistance issues (those panniers act as a significant sail). Stopping was slower, since the energy dissipated is partially based on the weight, and hill climbing must have been slower, too, but it wasn't noticeable.

[Shaggy Hiker]

Shaggy, I want to hear more about your ride. Can you post in a new thread?

What's to say? I was only out for six days. I crossed two significant mountains and did at least one other significant climb. I guess the big ride will have to be put off until next year. August and early September is too busy and too much on fire for me to seriously want to attempt the ride in those times. It will take me a couple weeks to swap bikes for one with beefier brakes, which is pretty important unless I want to go REALLY slowly down hills.

Theoretically, I might have been able to keep my brakes cool had I kept my speed down around 3-5 mph with lots of stab braking. I didn't try that. The energy dissipated is the weight times the square of the speed, so I might have been able to keep the rims tolerably cool if I never let the speed get up. I'm not sure if that would even be possible, though, as I would reach 10mph in seconds on those hills. To keep the speed down, I'd have to be braking nearly constantly, which might heat the rims pretty badly anyways.

[dday9]

I've been riding a bike too. Unfortunately mine is stationary and without any pretty views.

[Witis]

The wildcard in the weight is the bike itself. Being a mountain bike, it will be heavier than a touring bike. I just don't know how MUCH heavier. I probably ought to weight the WHOLE kit (bike included). I think that around 40 lbs of weight on the bike is probably about right, but there are factors that could mean that it would be quite a bit heavier. Not more than 60 at the top end, and possibly even lower than 40. The bike itself can't be less than 20, and is probably a fair amount heavier than that. I really didn't want to know.

But what sort of mountain bike is it, if you are riding that far to the office everyday it is probably a named brand bike and made out of aluminium and designed to take some serious impacts especially if it is designed for mountain bike racing, those guys really are crazy. Although I would have thought that your bike would have light weight disc brakes if it was a racing model.

What mattered was how the handling was, and the handling was remarkably easy. Of course, when you look at the physics of the thing, the weight is not carried by me at all. When the bike is not moving, I am carrying 0 extra pounds due to the weight of the bike. When I am pedaling, I am moving the bike forwards, and that will be impacted by the weight in the amount of energy needed to move the bike, and in any wind resistance issues (those panniers act as a significant sail). Stopping was slower, since the energy dissipated is partially based on the weight, and hill climbing must have been slower, too, but it wasn't noticeable.

Yeah I guess that if you are carrying more weight you want the load spread evenly over the whole bike so that you don't lose control and get death wobbles if you have picked up a lot of speed, and so that you don't fall off when cornering due to centre of gravity effects.

[Witis]

I've been riding a bike too. Unfortunately mine is stationary and without any pretty views.

I would have thought you'd be riding an interactive virtual tour model, currently a Louisiana State University favourite: http://www.bupipedream.com/news/26296/bike-story/

[Shaggy Hiker]

But what sort of mountain bike is it, if you are riding that far to the office everyday it is probably a named brand bike and made out of aluminium and designed to take some serious impacts especially if it is designed for mountain bike racing, those guys really are crazy. Although I would have thought that your bike would have light weight disc brakes if it was a racing model.

Oops, I was a bit misleading. The bike I use for commuting is not the mountain bike I used on the ride. The commuter bike is actually a good touring bike from the late 70s/early 80s, which means nothing modern about it. It's a steel-frame bike that had drop bars, suicide shift levers on the drop tube, and U brakes (if I remember right). I replaced the handle bars with horizontal bars with a slight rise to them for a more upright posture (the drop bar wrap was decayed pretty badly, and I didn't like the brakes being down there), moved the shift levers to thumb levers at the grips, and switched out the brakes as I moved the wheels over from 27" to 700 (because finding 27" rims is getting pretty difficult).

Yeah I guess that if you are carrying more weight you want the load spread evenly over the whole bike so that you don't lose control and get death wobbles if you have picked up a lot of speed, and so that you don't fall off when cornering due to centre of gravity effects.

Lots of tail weight seemed to work really well. I had essentially NO extra weight on the front forks (only rear bags). Aside from that, the basic rule is to keep the weight as low as possible to improve cornering. The handling was all I could ask for on trail or road, even under full load.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I have a treadmill that can be programmed to different gradients. I can make up a 20 minute (or maybe 40 minute) program. I thought it would be pretty cool to make a video to play on the computer monitor I have rigged on the treadmill such that I would be watching a route as I hiked it. Unfortunately, the treadmill doesn't allow for continuously variable gradients. Every gradient has to be held for a minimum of one minute before changing grades. That would mean that I'd have to choose a route that had no short climbs (and I can't go to negative gradients).

[Witis]

Oops, I was a bit misleading. The bike I use for commuting is not the mountain bike I used on the ride. The commuter bike is actually a good touring bike from the late 70s/early 80s, which means nothing modern about it. It's a steel-frame bike that had drop bars, suicide shift levers on the drop tube, and U brakes (if I remember right). I replaced the handle bars with horizontal bars with a slight rise to them for a more upright posture (the drop bar wrap was decayed pretty badly, and I didn't like the brakes being down there), moved the shift levers to thumb levers at the grips, and switched out the brakes as I moved the wheels over from 27" to 700 (because finding 27" rims is getting pretty difficult).

Is that what you started with:

The new handle bars likely make it look like a tourer/mountain bike hybrid. Did you change the pedals to clipless pedals and have you added those handle bars that sit like an inverted U on top of your normal bars to allow you to make a more streamlined position for the speedier sections of your ride?

Lots of tail weight seemed to work really well. I had essentially NO extra weight on the front forks (only rear bags). Aside from that, the basic rule is to keep the weight as low as possible to improve cornering. The handling was all I could ask for on trail or road, even under full load.

Ah yes so you added a rack and touring panniers to your mountain bike to carry your kit - a tried and tested way to get the job done - and it reads like really heavy panniers don't adversely effect the handling too much either. Did you buy a racing mountain bike or a standard mountain bike, a modern racing mountain bike should be plenty tough enough for your touring needs, I am not so sure about standard or older models.

[dday9]

I am almost finished with my Basic4Html project. I'm on the last two sections of this element list. I did NOT realize how many attributes the <input> tag has.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I've never used clips of any sort. They make me nervous, though everybody says that I shouldn't worry about it.

That bike does fit the description pretty well as far as the handlebars and shift lever location. Those look like the same brakes and brake levers, too, so that's a pretty good match. I didn't go for the bars you mention. I've seen them, but there isn't any real point in them on my commute. They might offer my an extra mph, or so, but that's not so much in the long run.

The mountain bike is pretty much a standard bike. The frame is aluminum, rather than anything more exotic, and pretty rugged. The seat post was inadequate, and I'll have to replace it, but otherwise it was pretty standard. Adding the rack was a bit difficult, though the attachment points were present for the most part. The attachment at the front of the rack was at an awkward angle. I didn't have any trouble with the rack once I had attached it.

[Witis]

I have a treadmill that can be programmed to different gradients. I can make up a 20 minute (or maybe 40 minute) program. I thought it would be pretty cool to make a video to play on the computer monitor I have rigged on the treadmill such that I would be watching a route as I hiked it. Unfortunately, the treadmill doesn't allow for continuously variable gradients. Every gradient has to be held for a minimum of one minute before changing grades. That would mean that I'd have to choose a route that had no short climbs (and I can't go to negative gradients).

Sounds like quite a good treadmill for at home use, and it sure beats getting wet in the rain, there's nothing worse than cold and wet feet and legs. I guess you use the monitor to watch television shows instead of the hiking routes you mentioned. I just use an old pair of shoes if the weather looks a bit iffy and then go out walking. It means that I get rained on from time to time, sometimes even when using an umbrella as the wind can pick up enough to soak me. That's when I need a treadmill.

[Witis]

That bike does fit the description pretty well as far as the handlebars and shift lever location. Those look like the same brakes and brake levers, too, so that's a pretty good match. I didn't go for the bars you mention. I've seen them, but there isn't any real point in them on my commute. They might offer my an extra mph, or so, but that's not so much in the long run.

You might want to try some, I have heard a lot of riders comment that once they put them on they never take them off again. I guess the position really can reduce the drag enough to make it easier to ride faster. Do you have a pic of what your bike looks like after all of your upgrades? It may look vaguely similar to that:

The mountain bike is pretty much a standard bike. The frame is aluminum, rather than anything more exotic, and pretty rugged. The seat post was inadequate, and I'll have to replace it, but otherwise it was pretty standard. Adding the rack was a bit difficult, though the attachment points were present for the most part. The attachment at the front of the rack was at an awkward angle. I didn't have any trouble with the rack once I had attached it.

I see, I have no idea how strong a standard mountain bike is once you add lots of extra weight and start riding up and down steep inclines and declines over thousands of miles. You seem to be trying to upgrade a standard bike to a race edition, so you might want to ask at a bike store just to double check if they think that your bike can cope with the weight or if you need to upgrade to a stronger/race model with disc brakes.

[Witis]

For a second there I am sure we were all forced to race in a game of dday9's Tron Lightcycles -> http://www.vbforums.com/showthread.p...on-Lightcycles

[Witis]

Spooky.

[Shaggy Hiker]

Sounds like quite a good treadmill for at home use, and it sure beats getting wet in the rain, there's nothing worse than cold and wet feet and legs.

My legs don't get cold, and I don't really mind wet feet. It happens. Much of my hiking was on the US east coast, where rain is common. Now that I am in the desert, rain is not so common.

I guess you use the monitor to watch television shows instead of the hiking routes you mentioned.

I do watch movies on there, but not TV. It's a computer monitor with a computer on a table beside the treadmill, so I can do a variety of things with it, but watching movies is the most common. I also hook the work laptop up to it and work on the treadmill at times. That's what I got it for, actually, I just find that there are things that can be done on a treadmill and things that cannot.

[Niya]

Some of these breast are abnormally large. And I like that.

You bad boy!

[Shaggy Hiker]

You might want to try some, I have heard a lot of riders comment that once they put them on they never take them off again. I guess the position really can reduce the drag enough to make it easier to ride faster. Do you have a pic of what your bike looks like after all of your upgrades?

Nope, no pics. Those bars might help, but I'm not sure I can fit them anymore. There's so much stuff attached to the handlebars already that I'd have some difficulty finding room. I also don't want to look too into it. I prefer a more relaxed look. Besides, if I went to the trouble of reconfiguring the bike for a more upright stance, why would I want to add something that accomodates a MUCH less upright stance?

I see, I have no idea how strong a standard mountain bike is once you add lots of extra weight and start riding up and down steep inclines and declines over thousands of miles. You seem to be trying to upgrade a standard bike to a race edition, so you might want to ask at a bike store just to double check if they think that your bike can cope with the weight or if you need to upgrade to a stronger/race model with disc brakes.

I already am upgrading to a model with disc brakes. In general, my feeling is that race models are based on decreasing weight not increasing load-carrying ability. They may be tougher, too, since they can be used for some crazy speeds over very rough terrain, but they should be trying to balance weight against toughness, whereas I'm only interested in toughness. I'm also not all that interested in shelling out big $$$ for a bike that will only be used a few times for this purpose. After this ride, I don't expect to be doing lots more. Too much hiking to get done.

Another point is that the place where I could stand for a more rugged bike would be in the shifting and the chain. Chains don't come in different degrees of durability, as far as I can tell. They're all made of the same stuff and in pretty much the same way (which is why the tools to work with them are all the same). Further, gears are gears, so that only leaves the shifters. There are some improvements that could be made to better deal with the dust (sealed springs and moving parts), but the cost of such components might be prohibitive.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I don't know who that is, but her IX keeps shifting shoulders.

[Inferrd]

A troglodyte

[Witis]

My legs don't get cold, and I don't really mind wet feet. It happens.

Really? I read it but I don't believe it. :Þ

Much of my hiking was on the US east coast, where rain is common. Now that I am in the desert, rain is not so common.

My theory is that your legs don't get cold and you don't mind wet feet 'cause you now live in the desert. One really cold, wet, and windy walk for at least a couple of hours where you are soaked to the bone should get you longing for a hot shower, warm clothes, and central heating.

I do watch movies on there, but not TV. It's a computer monitor with a computer on a table beside the treadmill, so I can do a variety of things with it, but watching movies is the most common. I also hook the work laptop up to it and work on the treadmill at times. That's what I got it for, actually, I just find that there are things that can be done on a treadmill and things that cannot.

Watching movies would be kinda fun, especially when there is no scenery and no one to interact with and you decide to go for a 2+ hour hike. How do you work when you are on the treadmill, I can't imagine it would be too much fun.

[Witis]

Nope, no pics. Those bars might help, but I'm not sure I can fit them anymore. There's so much stuff attached to the handlebars already that I'd have some difficulty finding room. I also don't want to look too into it. I prefer a more relaxed look. Besides, if I went to the trouble of reconfiguring the bike for a more upright stance, why would I want to add something that accomodates a MUCH less upright stance?

I thought it was about comfort. The drop bars are ok but they can be very uncomfortable on long rides so you have to sit upright with your hands on top of the bars for most of the time, the new inverted U shape is streamlined and comfortable which is why riders can use that position for the complete length of a time trial. But you never know unless you try them for yourself as everyone is different especially when you are talking about backs and comfort.

I already am upgrading to a model with disc brakes.

I thought you were going to fit disc brakes to a standard model rather than upgrading to a tougher model?

In general, my feeling is that race models are based on decreasing weight not increasing load-carrying ability. They may be tougher, too, since they can be used for some crazy speeds over very rough terrain, but they should be trying to balance weight against toughness, whereas I'm only interested in toughness. I'm also not all that interested in shelling out big $$$ for a bike that will only be used a few times for this purpose. After this ride, I don't expect to be doing lots more. Too much hiking to get done.

You may be right about the standard frame being strong enough for you, but remember most folks just ride their mountain bikes on the road so there isn't much incentive to over engineer them very much as anyone serious about mountain biking is usually going to have to buy a serious model knowing the extra stress that is put on the bike and they have shock absorbers and disc brakes unlike the standard model. I don't imagine that the race models would be weaker than the standard models even though they are lighter in the same way that F1 cars can withstand a crash at high speeds unlike regular cars. Hiking is definitely a safer option although you don't get the chance to see as much scenery.

Another point is that the place where I could stand for a more rugged bike would be in the shifting and the chain. Chains don't come in different degrees of durability, as far as I can tell. They're all made of the same stuff and in pretty much the same way (which is why the tools to work with them are all the same). Further, gears are gears, so that only leaves the shifters. There are some improvements that could be made to better deal with the dust (sealed springs and moving parts), but the cost of such components might be prohibitive.

I am fairly sure that the more that you spend on a mountain bike the more durable the entire bike including the sprokets and chain, for example in cheaper models you can hear the wear in the noise the chain and gears make after only a couple of years of infrequent use unlike racing kit which sounds good even after 5 years of heavy daily use when properly maintained. Ask at a store they might be able to tell you the different metals and compounds used for each part of the bike including the chain, sprokets, wires, and gears. Obviously you don't want to buy a world mountain bike championship bike for $6000+, but you might find that spending $1000-2000 gets you the kit you need for your 1000 mile all terrain trips.

[Shaggy Hiker]

Really? I read it but I don't believe it. :Þ

It's true. In fact, it's something I've relied on since I was fairly young. I generally don't have to wear much on my legs on the coldest of days. On the other hand, my arms DO get cold, so I almost never wear vests. That means that when it is -30, I was wearing a couple shirts, but nothing but a pair of jeans for pants, and was fine...until my moustache froze to my beard and I couldn't open my mouth anymore.

My theory is that your legs don't get cold and you don't mind wet feet 'cause you now live in the desert. One really cold, wet, and windy walk for at least a couple of hours where you are soaked to the bone should get you longing for a hot shower, warm clothes, and central heating.

Only on the top half. I used to go for walks for hours in the winter in New Hampshire without my legs getting cold. I hike in the rain wearing only shorts. If I start to get cold, I put on a jacket, but never pants. I don't even carry pants hiking, except for a pair of rain pants that are necessary for bug protection some mornings and evenings.



Watching movies would be kinda fun, especially when there is no scenery and no one to interact with and you decide to go for a 2+ hour hike. How do you work when you are on the treadmill, I can't imagine it would be too much fun.[/QUOTE]

[Shaggy Hiker]

I thought you were going to fit disc brakes to a standard model rather than upgrading to a tougher model?

I did consider that, and I may have said that at one point, but there was always another option, which is the one I am going to try out. My father has a very similar bike to the one I have, except that it has disc brakes. I'm going to swap bikes with him, so it may be the same as just putting disc brakes on the bike I have, except that there will be less expense and effort.

You may be right about the standard frame being strong enough for you, but remember most folks just ride their mountain bikes on the road so there isn't much incentive to over engineer them very much as anyone serious about mountain biking is usually going to have to buy a serious model knowing the extra stress that is put on the bike and they have shock absorbers and disc brakes unlike the standard model.

That may be the case, but these frames seem pretty tough. Both bikes are hard tails, but have front shocks. I prefer the hard tail for climbing, as no energy is spent on compressing the rear shocks. Of course, rigging a rack on a full-suspension bike is virtually impossible because of the traveling distance of the rear shock. The rack would also have the same traveling range.

Obviously you don't want to buy a world mountain bike championship bike for $6000+, but you might find that spending $1000-2000 gets you the kit you need for your 1000 mile all terrain trips.

Spending $0 works for me, too. I'll try that out, first, probably in September.

[Witis]

It's true. In fact, it's something I've relied on since I was fairly young. I generally don't have to wear much on my legs on the coldest of days. On the other hand, my arms DO get cold, so I almost never wear vests. That means that when it is -30, I was wearing a couple shirts, but nothing but a pair of jeans for pants, and was fine...until my moustache froze to my beard and I couldn't open my mouth anymore.

Heh, at that temperature you might even be able to splash a bit of hot water from your herbal tea and see it freeze in mid air.

Only on the top half. I used to go for walks for hours in the winter in New Hampshire without my legs getting cold. I hike in the rain wearing only shorts. If I start to get cold, I put on a jacket, but never pants. I don't even carry pants hiking, except for a pair of rain pants that are necessary for bug protection some mornings and evenings.

I guess it is possible - I have seen a documentary about a guy who could withstand sub freezing temperature, e.g. spending extending periods in freezing water, and he even ran a marathon in the snow in open sandals (for grip otherwise he would have done it bare footed), shorts, and a tshirt. It seemed legit, although there is always the possibility that it was CGIed.

[Witis]

[Witis]

[Witis]

I did consider that, and I may have said that at one point, but there was always another option, which is the one I am going to try out. My father has a very similar bike to the one I have, except that it has disc brakes. I'm going to swap bikes with him, so it may be the same as just putting disc brakes on the bike I have, except that there will be less expense and effort.

Fair enough and an easy way to save $1000+.

That may be the case, but these frames seem pretty tough. Both bikes are hard tails, but have front shocks. I prefer the hard tail for climbing, as no energy is spent on compressing the rear shocks. Of course, rigging a rack on a full-suspension bike is virtually impossible because of the traveling distance of the rear shock. The rack would also have the same traveling range.

In that case the frame might be ok, how much did you spend on it?

Spending $0 works for me, too. I'll try that out, first, probably in September.

I can't argue with that.

[Witis]

Some of these breast are abnormally large. And I like that.

DD does it for dday9.

[Witis]

10010011110

[Witis]

10010001000