National Character

While many countries are rich in bicycle heritage, some have particularly strong associations with distinct styles of bikes: the Netherlands with the omafiets and the bakfiets, France with the mixte, porteur and randonneur, England with the roadster and the elaborately lugged "lightweight," Italy with the Frascona curve and the racing bike, the US with the cruiser and the mountain bike. Far from arbitrary, these connections can be revealing about the history and the cultural values of the country where each design developed, and this aspect is always interesting for me. 

Some connections are obvious, while others more subtle. Why for instance, did some countries (England, Holland) favour the loop frame design for step-through bicycles, while the swan frame is the dominant design in others (Sweden, Austria)? Did it have to do with women's fashions at the time these bicycles were developed? What accounts for the development of low trail vs mid/high-trail geometry and the tradition to carry luggage on the front vs on the rear? There is nothing I can think of that is country-specific that would explain this. And what about the early preference of derailleurs to internally geared hubs in France, even on city bicycles? Things like this are constantly going through my mind when I look at different bicycles and think about their history.

When it comes to building bicycles today, the national characteristics of a particular design continue to play a role, while also meshing with other traditions. European manufacturers have used American mountain bikes for inspiration. American builders and manufacturers have used Dutch bikes and French porteurs for inspiration. The end product inevitably reflects an interesting mix of historical traditions and cultural values.

As I was working on, then riding, and then writing about the Randonneur over the past 8 months, I keep thinking how interesting it was that this old French design is now thriving (relatively speaking of course) in the US, with fairly minor modifications from the original. I suppose it makes sense: There is lots of land here, lots of places to travel, and Americans value speed - hence the growing popularity of randonneuring. Add to that the custom bicycle boom, and suddenly American framebuilders - for whom only three years ago "clearance for wide tires" meant 28mm - are building 650Bx40mm bikes with elaborate custom racks and cantilever brake bosses - an entirely normal feature now thanks to the popularity of cyclocross. Since American culture is a mish-mash of other traditions, it seems only natural that US builders are inspired by French, or Italian, or Dutch bikes. But what about a country with a very distinct tradition of its own? Can you see a low trail randonneuring bicycle made by an English builder, or is that too strange? I've been discussing a possible project with Mercian Cycles, and if it works it could be interesting in that respect. The national character of bicycles is increasingly fluid and playful, and some traditions are kept alive through other countries' takes on them. 

Read More

The Randonneur Experiment: a Review

Throughout the Spring and Summer of 2011, I collaborated with Royal H. Cycles to create a classic low-trail 650B randonneuring bicycle, then test rode it for 220 miles before it was delivered to the new owner. The project was inspired by Jan Heine, whose championing of this type of bicycle made some of us rabid with curiosity. This review has been long in the works. In parallel I've been preparing an article about the same bike for the Bicycle Quarterly, and needed to make sure that its content did not overlap too much with this write-up. Now that the BQ article is finally finished, I feel that the project is complete and would like to reflect upon it here.

If this is the first you are reading about this bike, then you may want to start here before proceeding:

. Making Sense of Rivendell's vs Bicycle Quarterly's Philosophies
. A Beautiful Experiment
. Lovely Bicycle x Royal H Randonneur
. 650B Rivendell Sam Hillborne and Randonneur Compared

The posts above describe how the idea for the bike came about, as well as its construction and features, so I will not cover the same ground again here. At some point in the near future I will also write more about the project itself - what it was like to work together with a framebuilder and what I learned in the process. But here I will describe my impressions of the bicycle itself - particularly the aspects that were novel to me. Of course being involved in the bicycle's design, it would be somewhat absurd to either praise or critique its aesthetics and such. The point of this experiment was to form an impression of how this type of bicycle handles, and that is what I will focus on here.

The Low Trail Mystique

To briefly summarise, the Randonneur is a lugged steel low-trail bicycle with 650Bx42mm tires, fenders, dynamo lighting, front and rear racks, and a handlebar bag - made in the style of the 20th century French constructeurs. "Low-trail" refers to the front-end geometry of a bicycle and it differs from the typical mid/high trail geometry of most roadbikes today. Among classic and vintage bicycle enthusiasts, there is definitely a mystique surrounding the low trail randonneur, and dramatic descriptions of its handling abound - made all the more dramatic, I suspect, by the fact that this type of bicycle is fairly rare and few have actually ridden it. Certainly that was one of the factors that made me want to try it. The other factor was that Jan Heine's description of the bicycle suggested a combination of speed, responsiveness, comfort, and all-terrain capability that I found attractive.

The biggest surprise about the Randonneur once I began to ride it, was how "normal" it felt. Based on all of the things I had heard and read about low-trail handling by the time the bike was ready, I expected to be blown away by a radically different handling, which I would either love or hate. Instead, the bike felt... like a bike! When I mentioned this earlier, some interpreted it as my implying that I was disappointed with the Randonneur. However that is not what I meant to express at all. I simply meant that I did not find low trail handling to be "difficult" or unusual. While the Randonneur did have some interesting handling characteristics, it felt intuitive to ride and I think that my experience of this is important to communicate. It seems to me that the mystique surrounding low-trail geometry needlessly intimidates people.

So what did feel different about the low trail handling, even if I found it within the range of normal? Mainly, it was the way the bicycle behaved on turns. At slow speeds I found that I had to be slightly more active when turning than on other road bikes I'd ridden, to pay more attention to the act of turning if that makes sense. Interestingly, this made tight turns easier as opposed to more difficult: I felt as if I were more in control of the turn. I also noticed that on high speed descents along winding roads it was easier to keep my line of travel along the road's curvature; the Randonneur did not "resist" turning at high speeds as I sometimes feel typical roadbikes do. That said, all of this was rather subtle - at no point did this difference alarm or shock me. I would notice the unique behavior on turns and think "Oh neat, so it wants to do this and not that" - as opposed to feeling as if there was anything wrong. It's a different feeling is all, and I rather liked it.

Another outcome of low trail (though this is not about handling per se) is that it allows even small bicycles with fat tires and fenders to avoid toe overlap without the need for an overly long top tube. For me this is a huge deal, because I strongly dislike toe overlap and I ride small bikes. The fact that low-trail geometry automatically eliminates it as a concern is very appealing.

While yet another aspect of the low trail design is said to be its superior ability to handle a front load, in this respect my experience is unhelpful. I rode the bicycle with and without the medium Berthoud handlebar bag pictured here, and did not notice a significant difference. It felt fine with the bag. It felt fine without. Perhaps this lack of a difference is the point - meaning, you can add a full handlebar bag and the handling remains the same. However, some believe that a low-trail bike is meant to be ridden with a loaded bag at all times and will feel unstable without it. This I did not experience.

Best of Both Worlds?

The Bicycle Quarterly's descriptions of randonneuring bicycles suggest that they are essentially fully equipped, comfortable racers - thus offering the best aspects of touring bikes and racing bikes combined.

For me, the speed of the Randonneur was not quite on par with that of a racing bike (namely, the Seven Axiom I'd tried over the summer). However, the Randonneur was faster than my Sam Hillborne. It was also faster than various vintage roadbikes I've tried.

The weight of the complete bicycle (including bottle cages, MKS Touring pedals and handlebar bag) was around 26lb (for comparison, my Sam Hillborne is 31lb with a similar setup), which is fairly light given all the stuff it is outfitted with, but not racing bike territory. The standard diameter tubing made it easier for me to carry the bike (my hand could close around the top tube, whereas with oversized tubing it cannot), which was much appreciated.

As far as comfort, the Randonneur was the feather bed of bicycles. While I have no complaints at all about the comfort of my Rivendell, the Randonneur felt even better, as well as less fatiguing at the end of a ride. In part this may be due to the flexible, standard diameter tubing. Of course given this lightweight and flexible tubing, bicycles like the Randonneur are not suitable for carrying as much weight as touring bikes.

Notes on Components

I won't go over all of the components this bicycle is fitted with, but would like to highlight the ones that were new to me or made an impression.

As mentioned earlier, I loved the Grand Bois Maes handlebars with their flat ramps and parallel drops. I am addicted to Campagnolo ergo levers at this point, and the Veloce model here (also on my Rivendell) is an economical option that works perfectly well for me. I prefer the Schmidt SON dynamo hub on this bicycle to the Shimano hub on my own bike, and the Edelux headlight is the nicest dynamo light I have tried thus far. The Grand Bois Hetre tires I love so much - both on the Randonneur and on my Rivendell - that I cannot imagine not owning a bike fitted with them. I was impressed with the Nitto lugged stem, truly a work of art. The Berthoud handlebar bag intimidated me somewhat with its beautiful styling, but the multiple sizes it comes in might make it a more convenient alternative to the enormous Ostrich handlebar bag I have on my own bike.

In the process of riding this bike I also discovered that I prefer the men's Berthoud touring saddle to the women's. I never wear skirts on roadbikes anyhow, and the longer nose and slightly narrower saddle feels even better here than the shorter, wider version on my own bike.

I am not certain what I think of cantilever brakes - not just on this bicycle, but in general. On fast descents, both the Randonneur and my own canti Rivendell are rather effortful for me to stop. These brakes are supposed to be very powerful and are the classic brakes to use with this style of bicycle, so I am not sure what the alternatives are. That said, almost everyone I know loves cantis, so I might just be an anomaly (I do have very weak hands).

If I were speccing out this bicycle from scratch today, the one change I would make would be to go with the new Rene Herse crankset (which was not yet available last summer). This would be a more aesthetically appropriate (albeit much pricier) option than the Sugino Alpina crankset we used, and its gearing versatility would have allowed us to use a short-cage rear derailleur for an overall more classic look to the drivetrain. None of this however would change the bike's functionality.

I was quite happy with how the Randonneur worked as a whole, including components and accessories. Nothing rattled loose or malfunctioned in the course of my test rides, which included road and gravel.

Verdict

Based on my experience with the Randonneur, my impression is that this type of bicycle combines some of the best features of road-racing bikes and all-terrain touring bikes, but does not replace either. If I owned this bicycle, I would still want a pure road-racing bike in addition. And for those interested in fully loaded touring, the Randonneur would not be the right choice for carrying that much weight. But for self-supported long distance events, endurance events, recreational and nature rides, and anything involving off-road trails and mixed terrain I believe this would be just the ticket - both for competitive cycling and for pleasure. The standard diameter tubing, wide 650B tires, fast and responsive handling, fenders, lights and moderate luggage make it an option worth considering for those who feel that touring bikes are overbuilt for them, while road/racing bikes are unsuitable for real-world conditions. In my view, the low trail geometry is not nearly as quirky as some suggest, and has the additional benefit of avoiding the dreaded toe overlap.

A question I've been asked a number of times now over email, is whether I plan to get a bicycle like this made for myself and whether I would recommend it to others. The first part of this question is tough to answer, because if I did get a bicycle like this then it would replace my Rivendell - I neither need nor can afford to own two 650B road-to-trail bikes! So I just don't know yet whether I want to go through that upheaval. That said, I do think that a bicycle like the Randonneur is extremely appropriate for my style of riding, for all the reasons described in this review. If I did decide to replace my Rivendell with a lighter and faster bike with the same wide tires and handlebar bag, something like this would be it. As for recommending it to others, I don't even dare go there. We are all so different, and only you can decide whether a bicycle like this is suitable for your needs.

Afterthoughts...

An important aside here, is that when designing a bicycle like this, geometry and tubing choice are crucial. If you decide to have a classic low-trail randonneuring frame built, be sure the builder fully understands your request. It is popular now to refer to all bicycles fitted with fenders, racks, and tires wider than 23mm as "rando bikes," but the bicycle I describe here is a very particular animal and the builder needs to understand that - unless of course you can supply them with the full geometry and specifications. There is now also a number of ready-made randonneuring frames (though none of them fully lugged, as far as I understand) that may be suitable for those reluctant to go custom, including the Box Dog Pelican and the Rawland RSogn.

The length of this review makes me realise just how much information I have stored up about this bicycle. Stay tuned for the write-up about the project itself - including commentary on the framebuilder's work, detailed descriptions of the geometry and all that. And for those interested in the Bicycle Quarterly article (which will contain different content still), look for the Spring 2012 issue.

My sincere thanks to everyone involved in this project: Bryan of Royal H. Cycles, Jim A. of Harris Cyclery, and Jim P. the bicycle's owner - as well as to Jan of the Bicycle Quarterly for the inspiration and advice. More pictures here and here!

Read More

Which Bike for Long Rides?

After I wrote about completing my first 100 mile ride on an upright bicycle with an internally geared hub, I've received emails from readers asking to elaborate on the difference between doing long rides on a roadbike versus an upright bike. Previously, I had written that I prefer to ride a bicycle with drop bars for rides longer than 30 miles, and that I prefer to wear cycling clothing on long rides. Yet here I was riding 100 miles on a city bike wearing street clothing. Did I change my mind? Am I saying that roadbikes are unnecessary after all?

The short answer is that I think it's all a matter of context. I never did - and still don't - claim that one type of bike is categorically "better" than another. Instead, I think that any cyclist would benefit from considering their specific set of circumstances, preferences and abilities - and planning accordingly. Here are just a few factors that I think are worth taking into account:

Terrain
Having experienced both, I cannot stress enough how different it is to cycle on hilly versus flat terrain. There is a reason why I did not attempt a 100 mile ride on an upright IGH bike in Boston (and don't plan to), but was comfortable doing so in Vienna: With Vienna as the starting point, it is possible to choose a fairly flat route along the Danube River. Starting from Boston, there is no direction I could possibly go in where I would not encounter hills. Based on past experience, I know that to cycle in hilly New England, I prefer to be on a derailleur-geared roadbike with drop handlebars, and to wear cycling-specific clothing. And based on past experience, I know that the same degree of cycling-specific preparation is not necessary for the flat Danube cycling path. In fact, I regularly encounter cyclists there who are in the middle of a cross-country tour, riding upright bikes laden with panniers. It works for them, as long as they do not deviate from the river trail. On the other hand, I almost never encounter cyclists riding anything other than roadbikes in the hilly areas outside Boston.

Of course, your definition of flat vs hilly could be different from mine. After all, there are those who complete Paris-Brest-Paris on upright bikes. Essentially, only you can know whether you would be comfortable tackling a particular route on an upright bike - bearing in mind that climbing one hill on the way home from work is not the same as climbing hill after hill over the course of a long ride.

Pace 
Not all cycling is the same, and a "100 mile ride" does not really describe anything other than milage. Do you prefer to ride fast or slow? Do you have a time limit in mind? Do you plan to take frequent breaks, or to cycle with as few interruptions as you can manage? On the upright bike, I did my 100 mile ride in 10 hours including breaks (8.5 hours not including breaks). Had I been training for a randonneuring event or even taking part in a charity ride, that kind of timing would be unacceptable. I knew that I had all day and was fine with cycling at a leisurely pace, so none of that mattered. But had I wanted to cycle faster, I would have chosen a roadbike even on flat terrain.

At least for me, speed also informs my clothing choice. When I cycle fast and in a roadbike position, I tend to get overheated quickly. For that and other reasons (fluttering, chafing), I prefer to do fast rides wearing cycling clothing, whereas for slower rides street clothing is fine. Again, your experience here may differ.

Companions
If you plan to cycle in a group, large or small, it is worth taking into consideration what types of bikes the others will be riding. If everyone else will be riding a roadbike, chances are that you will not be able to keep up on an upright bike. If everyone else will be riding an upright bike, it is an entirely different story. I did my 100 mile ride alone, so there was no issue of keeping up with others.

Comfort
Everyone's idea of "comfort" is different. Some have back, neck or shoulder issues that make it difficult to ride a roadbike. Others report being in extreme discomfort after too much time on an upright bike, finding that their weight is not distributed sufficiently, or else the handlebars don't allow for enough hand positions. To a great extent, these things also depend on a specific bicycle's geometry. That is why it is also important to build up to longer rides - so that you have some warning at what point a particular bike becomes uncomfortable. I knew that I could ride a Bella Ciao bike for 30+ miles without discomfort, and I decided to take the chance. After 100 miles, I did find the limited hand position insufficient and tried to wiggle my hands around as much as possible to compensate - which more or less worked, but was not ideal. Less weight on my butt would have made me more comfortable as well, though lowering the handlebars helped.

Preferences
I know that many of my readers simply do not like roadbikes and do not like the idea of riding in cycling-specific clothing - so they want to hear that it's possible to complete long rides on an upright bike while dressed "normally." If that is your situation, that's fine. Simply start with that premise and take it from there. If you live in a hilly area but aren't a strong enough cyclist to tackle the hills on an upright bike, then it could be worthwhile to travel to a flatter region in order to complete the ride: Do some research and then take the train or drive to a suitable location, if that's what it takes. Why not?

I love all kinds of bicycles and am excited by the myriad of possibilities out there for different cyclists, different types of terrain, and different riding styles. From relaxed family touring along river valleys on upright bikes to pacelining up mountains on aggressive roadbikes, anything is possible. And I think that's great. If you have any tips based on your own experience, please do contribute. What is the longest ride you've ever done, and on what bike?

Read More

Must Haves: Dropbars with Flat Ramps

While dropbars tend to all look the same to those who are new to them, there are in fact lots of variations - most of which I find uncomfortable. This is particularly true of vintage bars, and it does not surprise me when others write to tell me they have trouble riding old roadbikes for this reason. What's uncomfortable about these dropbar designs, is their lack of flat "ramp" areas leading up to the brake hoods. When the brake lever is positioned on a dramatic slope, some report that their hands feel awkward and start to hurt on long rides. By contrast, famously comfortable handlebars - such as the Nitto Noodle and Randonneur models - have spacious, flat ramp areas that support the hands - both when on the hoods and behind the hoods. Rivendell explains about this feature here. And this comprehensive post about the difference in dropbar shape is definitely worth reading. My favourite flat-ramp dropbars so far have been the Grand Bois Maes (pictured above). They are similar to the Nitto Noodles, except that the ramps feel a bit longer and flatter, and the drops are parallel to the ramps. My hands absolutely love the feel of every part of these handlebars.

One thing that has me curious when it comes to the flat ramp design, is its origin. Until recently, my understanding was that it was a modern invention: a byproduct of the compact/ anatomic handlebars ushered in by the brifter era. It is often said that the Nitto Noodles basically combine this modern design with a vintage look, which is what makes them so popular. However, that does not jive with the description of the Grand Bois Maes bars as a remake of a 1950s Phillips Professionel model. Turns out that what many think of as a modern design is actually a mid-century design, which is rather fascinating. I would love to know the original inspiration behind this shape and why it was not more popular. After all, it is very difficult to find a set of vintage dropbars with flat ramps.

What has been your experience with drop handlebars? Can you tell the difference between the various shapes and do you have a favourite?

Read More

What's the Difference?

While the Randonneur collaboration bike was in my possession (it has now been shipped to its owner), for about a month I alternated between riding it and my own Rivendell in attempts to compare them.

When I mention the very idea of comparing these bikes I tend to get completely polarised reactions. To some they look identical: lugged frames, 650B wheels, wide tires, fenders, dynamo lighting, dropbars and classic handlebar bags. Can there possibly be significant differences in how they ride? To others, the bicycles are so obviously different in terms of geometry and tubing, that a comparison seems equally absurd: Of course they will be radically different!

So first, let me explain the two bicycles in a way that I hope does not get too technical. The green one on the left is the Rivendell Sam Hillborne. The frame has relaxed angles, long chainstays, and classic (mid/high) trail. The tubing is oversized to support heavy loads. The top tube is unusually long for the frame size and slightly sloped, for reasons to do with Rivendell's approach to bike fit. It is fundamentally a touring bike, but with some quirky qualities thrown in.

The blueish bike is a one-off collaboration between Royal H. Cycles and myself. Built as a classic randonneuring frame, it is made using skinny, somewhat flexible tubing with fairly steep angles, moderate length chainstays, and low trail. The Randonneur is supposed to be lighter, faster and more responsive than a touring bike, yet still comfortable. The low trail geometry is considered to be optimal for carrying a front load, but overall the bike is not meant to be heavily loaded.

Fully built up with similar components, the Randonneur indeed came out lighter than the Rivendell. Unfortunately I do not have a scale to weigh them - but I estimate maybe 4-5lb (when comparing with handlebar bags attached and everything else shown here). [Edited to add: The difference between these bicycles as shown is 6lb. The Randonneur weighs 26lb and the Sam Hillborne 31lb.]

The difference in tubing is immediately apparent, both when looking at the bikes in person and when picking them up by the top tubes - I can close my hand around the Randonneur's top tube much easier. This made the Randonneur easier for me to pick up, carry around when necessary, and take in and out of the house. As for how the tubing and other differences translate into ride quality, it is difficult to say. The Randonneur is a faster bike, though modestly so. It is also less fatiguing and perhaps a wee bit cushier over bumps. I can feel the frame and fork flex as I ride, but not too much. And I would certainly not attempt to do this on the Randonneur - I think the frame might bend in half.

Regarding the low trail geometry, I have yet to organise my thoughts on that topic. Suffice to say that I expected a "weirdness" in the bicycle's handling that, for me, just wasn't there (though an acquaintance who test rode the bike disagrees). Yes, it handled differently under some conditions - but the same can be said of almost every bike in comparison to almost every other bike.

And perhaps the biggest surprise of all, was that I did not feel a significant difference in the way the two bicycles behaved with a front load. Yes, the Randonneur is spectacular at carrying weight in the handlebar bag... but then so is the Rivendell. Maybe I am not as sensitive to this specific aspect of bicycle handling as others, but I am not sure I could feel a difference. I also did not think the Randonneur was at all "unridable" without a front load, as some warned me about. Again, it is possible that I simply lack the sophistication and experience to sense the difference, but there you have it.

When I initially planned to compare the low trail Randonneur to my Rivendell, I assumed that I would prefer one type of bicycle over the other. Instead, it became clear that the two bikes are simply optimised for different types of cycling. Both are versatile in that they can be ridden on and off road equally comfortably, are fully equipped, and can carry at least some of the cyclist's belongings. The Randonneur is a somewhat faster, lighter and more "precise" ride, but it would not work in a fully loaded capacity. The Rivendell can haul great quantities of stuff unflinchingly, but at the expense of that extra bit of speed and maneuverability. The Randonneur is, of course, a custom bike with all the attention to fit and craftsmanship that implies, so I am not comparing on that level.  But as far as the ride quality goes both bikes are great, just for different, albeit overlapping, uses. As for what role low trail geometry plays in all of this, I am honestly still not sure. Despite my pages of elaborate notes about the Randonneur's handling, I cannot say it is "better" or "worse" than typical mid/high trail geometry. My impressions of the handling are vivid, but oddly devoid of a value judgment. Vive la différence?

Read More

Notes from the Trails

I have been trying to cycle on dirt trails a couple of times a week in preparation for D2R2, and I wanted to jot down some notes while it is all still new and wonderous to me. While this is by no means meant as advice, perhaps my impressions will be useful to those who are similar in skill and level of fitness, and are considering giving this a try.

It is effortful!
Naively, I thought that my biggest hardship with cycling on dirt and gravel would be the technical aspect - dealing with roots, rocks, loose surfaces and the like. Well, ha-ha. While it's not exactly a surprise that cycling on rough terrain takes more effort than on a smooth road (think walking on sand vs on a paved sidewalk), I did not expect it to be quite this draining. Replacing only 5 miles of a 40 mile ride with off-road trails made a big difference in how tired I felt afterwards. And here I thought that I was getting fit with all that roadcycling; turns out I am a weakling.

Molehills become mountains
Directly related to the previous point, is the need to use lower gearing for everything. Benign-looking upward inclines on gravel or packed sand feel like proper hills do on pavement. Huge difference!

Just keep pedaling
This simple concept has been tremendously helpful. If a stretch of the trail seems difficult, or slippery, or overly bumpy, continuing to pedal (instead of coasting or trying to stop) is the best way to get through it. It was counter-intuitive in the beginning, but quickly became intuitive. The best way not to fall or get stuck is to quickly switch to a low enough gear and pedal through it.

Foot retention is helpful

Having my feet snugly inside Power Grips helps when I get nervous, discouraging me from attempting to stop the bike (which is a good way to fall) and teaching me how to keep my balance.

Scenery is everything
Beautiful surroundings are a huge motivator for me. The first couple of trails I tried were sort of monotonously woodsy and led nowhere. I did not find cycling on them particularly enjoyable, because all the focus was on the terrain and there wasn't anything exciting to look at. Then we went through a different set of trails - with farms, meadows, varied stretches of woods, historical structures, fields of sunflowers, and a network of narrower paths going off in all directions - and it became an entirely different story. Suddenly I was interested and wanted to keep going despite being tired, and suddenly that narrow muddy offshoot of the path began to seem worth following just to see where it would lead. After a couple of these experiences, I will amend my earlier ambivalent comments about cycling off road with "I like it, if the scenery is worth it."

It surprised me to learn how many options there are for cycling off road close to Boston. The trails are all fairly short, but there is a great deal of variety. Though I am starting to doubt whether I am fit enough for even the easy 40 mile D2R2 route, I am enjoying this cautious exploration of a new type of cycling. It was not love at first site, but it is growing on me - particularly if meadows and old farms are involved.

Read More

A Look at Berthoud Handlebar Bags and Thoughts on Attachment Options

I finally received a Giles Berthoud handlebar bag for the Randonneur. It's the Model 25 in gray, which is their medium size and features elastic ties for the pockets instead of leather straps.

The visual presence of this bag is almost too much for me. There is something about its colour scheme and construction that says "I am French and I am exquisite," and I find this both interesting and intimidating.

But happily, the Berthoud does not overwhelm the aesthetics of the bicycle. The size is a perfect fit. And the darker fabric and lighter leather combination parallels the contrast between the frame and lugwork. In comparison, the Ostrich handlebar bag on my own bike is more drab and also more bulky.

The bag has a large front pocket,

two side pockets

and two rear pockets. The top flap closes toward, rather than away from the cyclist, which is the opposite of what I am used to with the Ostrich and makes it counterintuitive for me to use - but this is of course user-specific. You can see that leather straps are provided for wrapping around the back of the rack. However, there are no provisions for securing the bag to the rack's platform, which surprised me (Ostrich includes straps for this). I know that some devise DIY systems, and if you've done so I'd love to hear about your process.

There are leather straps provided for attaching the bag to the handebars, though most opt for installing a decaleur. And here is where we are experiencing a little glitch. Ideally, the owner would prefer to forgo a decaleur: He plans to ride both with and without the bag, and a bagless decaleur sticking out of the bicycle doesn't look great (I agree). The handlebar straps hold the bag up fine, but without being secured on the bottom it bounces on the rack when filled with stuff and going over bumps.  I am also told that the bag can move from side to side without a decaleur, though I haven't experienced this yet during my one test ride so far (with 10lb of weight in the bag).

As far as decaleurs go, we had planned to use one of these if going without proved impossible, but I have since been warned that using it with the Nitto lugged stem (as opposed to the regular Technomic stem) is not a good idea, for complicated reasons related to clamp compatibility that I won't go into here.  An alternative would be Berthoud's own decaleur, but it too apparently presents issues with the lugged stem - plus it is fairly obtrusive without the bag on. A headset-mounted decaleur is not possible here, because it would sit too low. So I am seeking a solution, and  also wondering whether securing the bag at the bottom would in itself solve the problem. The bag is not nearly as large as my Ostrich, and I know that some do manage to use it without a decaleur. Sharing of experiences in this regard would be most appreciated.

Read More

Royal H + Lovely Bicycle: Un Petit Projet

First an idea. Then a frame. Now finally a bike!

For those unfamiliar with this project, I have been collaborating with Bryan Hollingsworth of Royal H. Cycles to create a classic French randonneuring bicycle for a customer who was as curious as we were about how these mythical creatures handle.

It's become popular to call all sorts of bicycles "rando bikes." Framebuilders and manufacturers will sometimes use this term to mean "a fast bike with fenders and racks that's meant for long distance." However, we mean something very specific: the classic low-trail geometry design with wide 650B tires, in the tradition of the early French constructeurs - as described and enthusiastically recommended by Jan Heine in the Bicycle Quarterly (see my earlier post about BQ here). We found Jan's descriptions of these machines intriguing: They promised the comfort and convenience of a fully equipped, wide-tired touring bike with the speed and responsiveness of a racing bike. Could it really be?

Jan Heine and a couple of my personal contacts in France were immensely helpful with the process of figuring out the geometry. Jan also advised on the choice of tubing and a number of other details. We specifically wanted to consult with him on these matters, because the whole point was to try the sort of bike he recommended. While our bicycle is not a constructeur (the racks and other parts were purchased, and not custom-made for seamless integration), it is a fine handbuilt frame, fully equipped with fenders, front and rear racks, and internally wired lighting. I would also like to acknowledge that we had some help from Harris Cyclery with the finishing touches of the build.

Naturally the frame is lugged, and for me the aesthetics of the bicycle are strongly defined by the lugwork in the headtube and the fork crown. I was happy to see that these lugs remained a strong focal point even once the frame became "cluttered" with components and accessories. Notice also the tiny lug where the wire for the lighting enters the downtube. There is a matching one on the left chainstay, but I don't have a good shot of it just now.

I am not going to go into details of the frame construction and internal lighting right now, so that will have to be a separate post. Some of the components are pretty interesting - such as the Nitto lugged stem and the Grand Bois Maes handlebars - and I may write about them separately as well.

Will also write about combining Shimano drivetrains with Campagnolo shifters, which we have done to two bicycles so far.

The bicycle as shown here is not entirely complete: It's getting a handlebar bag in a few days, as well as bottle cages, a bell and a computer installed. I will be thoroughly test riding it over the course of the next month before it is sent off to the customer, and writing up my impressions in an article for Bicycle Quarterly. The BQ article will be different from, and more detailed than the posts here, so reading it will most definitely be worth it for those interested in the topic.

Yesterday I took the randonneur on its first ride: 40 miles consisting of the hilly countryside, a crowded bicycle path, and urban areas with heavy traffic. Some might say I should not be riding this type of bicycle without a handlebar bag at all, but I think it's important to get a sense of how it handles without any weight on it - even if the design is optimised for a front load, it seems worthwhile to compare the handling both with and without. The size of the frame is more or less right for me. If it were mine I would make the seat tube 1cm shorter, but probably would not change much else. I am particularly pleased that even on such a relatively small frame there is absolutely no toe overlap - in fact there is over an inch between the tip of my toe and the fender.

Because countless people have told me that low trail bicycles are a "love it or hate it" sort of thing, I expected to have an extreme reaction to the randonneur's handling. However, that did not happen. It rides like a bike, basically. A nice bike. Different from other bikes I've ridden, but not as radically differently as I expected from some of the dramatic descriptions I've read and heard. The most distinct qualities I've noticed so far are the the way it turns (different), accelerates (excellent) and climbs hills (oh my...). But I need some time to make sense of it all and put it into words, so please stay tuned.

In collaborating on the randonneur, my main agenda was to satisfy what had become a burning curiosity about this particular type of bike while also helping create a custom bicycle from scratch in keeping with my aesthetic vision - all of which was in line with what the customer wanted. We have no expectations about whether ultimately we will like or dislike the handling, since that is the whole point of the experiment. I will have the randonneur until September and am thankful for the chance to gain a firsthand understanding of these bicycles over the course of my temporary guardianship.

Read More

Adjustable Stem!

When I wrote about wanting a longer stem on one of my bikes, several people suggested I get ahold of a vintage adjustable stem. I did not know that such a thing existed, but clearly there is much I don't know.

Long story short, I am now in the temporary possession of a 3ttt Record Regolabile adjustable stem, on loan courtesy of Jan Heine of the Bicycle Quarterly. I decided to use it not on my own bike, but on the Royal H. randonneur collaboration - it just looked so appropriate.

Produced in the 1970s by Tecno Tubo Torino of Italy, this elegant stem adjusts from (I think) 6 cm to 12 cm. Here is more information about it and some close-up pictures. The beauty of this system is that it combines the vertical adjustability of the quill stem with the horizontal adjustability of the threadless stem (with the latter you can swap out stems without redoing your handlebar set-up). Why are things like this not being made anymore? Those of us who constantly change our minds about handlebar positions would find it extremely useful. Right now I have it adjusted for 8 cm, but who knows what the future holds - I am looking forward to playing around with this! 

Read More

Our Beautiful Experiment

When Bryan Hollingsworth phoned to tell me that "our" frame was back from the painter's, I dropped what I was doing, grabbed my camera and was there within minutes. For weeks I had been nervously anticipating the results of my emphatic description of what I wanted this frame to look like - a description presented in an illustrated 3-page document, then further clarified in a tête-à-tête with the painter. He must have thought I was insane to wax lyrical about the precise shade of "stormy seas" I had in mind. But no matter, because it's done and it looks just as I had imagined!

So what exactly is this frame? I have mentioned before in passing that I am collaborating with Bryan of Royal H. Cycles on a classic randonneuring bicycle. I provided the geometry and tubing specs (don't worry, I had a lot of help), came up with the colour scheme, and specced the components. Bryan built the frame with his signature touches, and will be putting the bike together - including internally routed lighting. In other words, he did the real work while I talked, gesticulated, sent emails, and took pictures. It takes all kinds.

It's difficult to tell at the drawing board how a frame will really look once it is finished, but this is pretty much what we hoped it would look like. The Everest lugset and Grand Bois fork crown are just perfect together. The tubing is True Temper OX Platinum, with Kaisei Toei Special fork blades.

This is a classic randonneuring frame in the sense that it has low trail geometry and is built for 650B wheels with wide tires. Specifically, we will be using the Grand Bois Hetres, and you can see them fitted onto the "naked" frame here. The build will be fairly classic and high quality, but nothing too flashy. We are going to try to keep the weight down as well. The frame and fork themselves feel very light.

Bryan had just ordered these custom RHC (Royal H Cycles) end caps for seat stays, and this is the first frame that will have them. He also made the cantilever cable hanger.

Front derailleur hanger.

Zink-plated dropouts, eyelets for fenders and rear rack.

Bottom bracket, cable routing, stainless kickstand plate. There is much more to this frame, but I will save it for when the bicycle is finished!

Bryan has several options for decal designs that he uses, and I wanted the frame to have aspects from different ones. So the head tube insignia design is from one set, while the downtube insignia is from another, and I love the way it all came together here. I also really wanted this band around the seat-tube, which reminds me of a vintage candy wrapper.

The main frame colour is a slate-blue-green metallic paint with very fine pearlescent particles. I suspect that this is the same or a similar paint as what Mercian uses for their polychromatic colour family, which they describe as resembling "the underside of tin foil." While it's not for everyone, I am crazy about this finish, and the colour really does resemble a stormy sea. The lugwork is off-white with a similar metallic shimmer as the main frame colour, resulting in a sort of mirror finish effect. In person this creates an interesting illusion, where the lugs sometimes look white, and at other times resemble the main frame colour. The lugwork is subtly outlined in gold.

Before this bicycle is sent off to the customer, I will be test riding it for a few weeks and inviting a couple of more experienced cyclists to test ride it as well. Neither the framebuilder, nor the customer, nor myself have any idea what to expect from this bike and that is part of the excitement. We all wanted to try a classic randonneuring bicycle, and creating one ourselves was an interesting way to make that happen. I will post more about this bike once it is built up, and will most likely be writing about it for Bicycle Quarterly sometime later this year, so stay tuned. A big thank you to everyone who helped make this happen. It is a beautiful experiment, and I can't wait to find out how it rides!

Read More