I cope fine on a modern HT with a Magic Mary up front and a Nobby Nic speed grip out back. Road riding for me is just a necessary evil to link up fun bits. Used it for all sorts. Yes it’s slower at some bits but still preferable to anything else seeing as though I can only have one bike.
There are always outliers, and you sound like one of my friends who happily rides his similarly tyred 160mm FS around on gravel rides with us. But how often are you riding 40 miles to link up the fun bits? Also, 'I can cope' - I can cope as well on my 150mm HT. I just choose not to because I have a better tool for the job.
Sounds like you can afford more than one bike. 40 miles would be relatively easy. Did 60 on a Stooge Dirtbomb with massive tyres! Very relaxing and comfortable.
For me, what I have is the best tool for the job. The fun bits just wouldn’t be fun on a gravel bike and generally weren’t when I’ve owned one.
Those offering a HT as an alternative to a gravel bike aren’t talking about modern LLS HTs, rather the sort with short travel forks and skinny tyres?
As I said earlier, my rigid SS is 66 HTA, 470mm reach (I'm 5'9"), 1200mm+ wheelbase and with 2.2 Conti Racekings and I don't see any benefits to a gravel bike on the tame, long KAW/ SDW style off road routes that gravel bikes are marketed for. Even more so if I fit some gears.
The rigid part is the bit that makes these technically easier but longer routes more challenging compared to a hardtail or full sus and also adds some snappiness in the climbing and accelerations which I think appeals to people on gravel bikes.
I do think there is a misconception that LLS must be "bad" in some way for less technical off road routes. I think the suspension and build determine that more. I certainly wouldn't want to do these rides on a 30lb+ 130mm forked hardtail. My rigid bike is still plenty twitchy and "XC" feeling and is certainly no boat when you need a bit of responsiveness. Modern geometry is way too cautious IMO and with a lighter build on LLS geo, possibly even with a rigid fork I reckon you get the best of all worlds
Did 60 on a Stooge Dirtbomb with massive tyres!
So your only bike is a niche bike that not many people will understand the point of, but you are complaining about other people riding bikes that you don't understand the point of?
Those offering a HT as an alternative to a gravel bike aren’t talking about modern LLS HTs, rather the sort with short travel forks and skinny tyres?
As I said earlier, my rigid SS is 66 HTA, 470mm reach (I’m 5’9″), 1200mm+ wheelbase and with 2.2 Conti Racekings and I don’t see any benefits to a gravel bike on the tame, long KAW/ SDW style off road routes that gravel bikes are marketed for. Even more so if I fit some gears.
Skinny tyres then, and rigid fork? See also the above ^
So your only bike is a niche bike that not many people will understand the point of, but you are complaining about other people riding bikes that you don’t understand the point of?
Is there such a thing as a light, durable, racey, curly barred bike that is actually not terrifying off road?
https://ukgravelco.com/fustle-causeway-gr1-review/
Or for more MTB leanings but not as light
https://ukgravelco.com/cotic-cascade-review/
So your only bike is a niche bike that not many people will understand the point of, but you are complaining about other people riding bikes that you don’t understand the point of?
No longer my bike. It’s now a Titus Fireline and I’m not complaining. Just stating that they’re not necessarily the best tool for the job. Depends on where you’re willing to compromise. You ever ridden a Stooge btw? One of the best all rounders for bridleway, towpath, bimbling and tacking proper off road (slowly) I’ve ever owned. Much better than any of the gravel bikes I’ve had
Isn’t the joy of gravel the choice of an objectively slightly worse bike for the same terrain.
I’ve just got one. Really enjoying exploring everything local again. Roots, rocks, mud, tarmac just rumbling on.
It’s not meant to be better. Just different.
Sometimes I don’t have beans for tea.
@idlejon are you saying my bike is niche? Less common maybe, but pretty much a default "bikepacking" MTB nowadays which is another buzz word for another day 🙂 2.2 is fairly usual XC width rather than skinny, and wider than most gravel bikes will take so significantly different enough from a gravel setup I'd have said. Likewise the geometry is significantly different to a gravel bike with no real downsides once you leave road bike territory
Maybe I should have titled the thread "Why are all drop bar bikes so similar off road to a luddite and where are they better off road than a "bikepacking" MTB"? 🙂
You ever ridden a Stooge btw? One of the best all rounders for bridleway, towpath, bimbling and tacking proper off road (slowly) I’ve ever owned.
No, although they do look interesting. I like odd bikes. I'd be concerned about the slow bit though - I often protest that I'm an old school XC rider and like to keep my wheels on the ground but really enjoy getting a bit rowdy on any bike. Not fast rowdy, just not slow rowdy. 😀
@idlejon are you saying my bike is niche?
Have I missed something here? A rigid SS - does SS mean singlespeed or something else? But yes, the rigid bit does push you into the niche camp. I approve thoroughly. 😀
2.2 is fairly usual XC width rather than skinny
I was being slightly tongue in cheek about 'skinny' but, even so, most people I ride with are on wider than that on MTBs. Even one of my gravel bikes has 2.1s. Depends on the terrain where you live, obviously.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52423155723_06cd232689_k.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52423155723_06cd232689_k.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/2nSsnNt ]20221012_143349[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/91703444@N06/ ]20ston[/url], on Flickr">
2 gravel bikes earlier today. you may not agree.
It’s not meant to be better. Just different.
It is meant to be better at smooth off-road, and it is.
It’s not meant to be better. Just different.
Yeah but...For me at least the attraction of MTB back in the 1990's was that I could now buy a bike that was decidedly, unapologetically "better for" off road. That's why we all bought them...It wasn't a road bike, It wasn't your dad's overweight tourer. The whole ethos of this new sort of bike was that they could go off road...We've now seemingly got to the point where "marketing" is trying hard to convince us that what we've all been striving to achieve - a better mountain bike for any and all terrain has all gone a bit too far, and what we really want is a slightly more capable road bike, or in fact, a slightly less capable MTB.
Every bike has its place, nothing will be perfect in all situations so there is always compromise. Someone who classes themselves as a mountain biker may not see the point of gravel bikes but a cyclist who likes road and MTB can enjoy a bit of both worlds.
For myself who has lots of bridleways nearby but none worth riding on a MTB, my gravel bike gives me loads more options of places to ride. I don't need an adrenaline rush every time I ride and that extends to mtbing as well, sometimes just riding your bike in a new place is enough.
You ever ridden a Stooge btw? One of the best all rounders for bridleway, towpath, bimbling and tacking proper off road (slowly) I’ve ever owned.
No, although they do look interesting. I like odd bikes. I’d be concerned about the slow bit though – I often protest that I’m an old school XC rider and like to keep my wheels on the ground but really enjoy getting a bit rowdy on any bike. Not fast rowdy, just not slow rowdy. 😀
Just to expand on that a little, you can ride a Stooge pretty quick off road, you would be very surprised...just watch out for those sharp braking bumps. Ride mine (Mk4 with the 80mm offset forks) here, there and everywhere. Wouldn't waste an uplift day riding it but I'd happily ride somewhere like C-Y-B on it and enjoy (most of) it. In fact I ride Cannock on it all the time as it's my local and there's not much I wouldn't do on it. Bloody brilliant machine.
Anyway, back to gravel/CX/road bikes...love the idea, never owned one, might do in the future
@ton - they are the styleee of bikes mrs_oab and I are erring towards. Hers is very similar to your small one already.
We would like to go up one tyre size, for comfort and ability to fit some knobblyish tyres..
I meanwhile am eying up a frame change to an A.L.I.C.E.
2 [s]gravel bikes[/s] hybrids earlier today.
FTFY @ton
Seriously though, I'm actually glad that the gravel moniker caught on. For too long folk would wander into bike shops asking for a cross bike when they really were after something less racy, that would mibbe take a rack and mudguards and a tyre greater than 33mm wide. Now it's clear(er) that they know what to ask for. Flat barred "not quite MTBs" have been around forever it's just that the word "hybrid" became unfashionably associated with shopping and commuting.
FWIW my "gravel" bike is a 12 year old Van Nicolas Amazon that was available as either "tourer" spec or as a Cross model.
Many of those who think that gravel is all just marketing seem to have missed that they've been caught in a constant "upgrade" cycle of increased suspension, changing geometry, gearing changes, wider rims and tyres, hydraulic brakes and now electric motors. 😂
We’ve now seemingly got to the point where....
...we've got loads of choice of different bikes for different occasions and/or terrain. Which is great. Some people won't like some bikes though, and some will refuse to understand that other people's choices are valid. This is the way....
We’ve now seemingly got to the point where….
there are 3 or 4 basic bike categories to cover the practically seamless transition of spec combinations between a road race bike at one end of the scale and a DH bike at the other, and it keeps entire forums and the careers of bike industry folk alive. I love bikes. Endless possibilities.
(or is it a track bike at one end)
they’ve been caught in a constant “upgrade” cycle of increased suspension, changing geometry, gearing changes, wider rims and tyres, hydraulic brakes and now electric motors
So take away the suspension and all of those things are true of road bikes to turn them into gravel bikes...
^ agree with that @scotroutes.
(Hybrid indeed.)
It is a way of ducking out of the technology race of BNG and 2% betterer and 4% moar.
.
Also agree that it is irrelevant what tag or moniker is given. All bikes are a compromise. Getting out on a bike is more important than what bike.
hybrid. and i thought we were friends.
PS - my Dalby red friendly gravel bike has 650B 47mm knobblies and my 40 mile round trip commuter bike has 700c 32mm slicks. There’s only so one frame, forks, gears, brakes etc though.
Bikes - Not only endless possibilities, but you can change their ride characteristics so easily too.
PPS @ton - that’s a pub bike. In fact aren’t all your bikes pub bikes. 😉
In fact aren’t all your bikes pub bikes.
And the issue with this is....?
there are 3 or 4 basic bike categories to cover the practically seamless transition of spec combinations between a road race bike at one end of the scale and a DH bike at the other, and it keeps entire forums and the careers of bike industry folk alive. I love bikes. Endless possibilities.
(or is it a track bike at one end)
1. Fun.
2. Funner.
3. Really fun.
4. Laugh out loud when riding fun.
never let a nice bike ride spoil a good drink............... ;o)
Getting out on a bike is more important than what bike.
This ^^^ just get out and ride.
You missed category 5. The bike that finds headwinds. This is the only non-fun bike.
never let a nice bike ride spoil a good drink…………… ;o)
Retirement definitely has its appeal.
#NotJealousHonest
Just to expand on that a little, you can ride a Stooge pretty quick off road, you would be very surprised…just watch out for those sharp braking bumps.
Sorry, I should have clarified when I said slow that I meant relative compared to a bike with suspension. I agree that they are pretty bloody quick for a rigid bike. Regret selling mine but missed a bit of suspension. Too many rocks on my local loops.
All bikes are great at the end of the day. If you can only have one just get one that’s the least compromised for you or the nearest to it that you can afford.
I’d argue the gravel bike is shitter than the fat bike fad !!
1. Fun.
2. Funner.
3. Really fun.
4. Laugh out loud when riding fun.
yep..
or
1. Pub bike
2. Pub stop mid ride bike
3. Beer after the ride bike
4. Can't ride it when drunk bike (probably the road bike)
I have road bikes and they are great. For the road. When there isn't too much traffic. The tyres are skinny enough that even a decent sized pebble can pop the front wheel off line suddenly, and any sharp edged hole is a guaranteed pinch flat, so require a lot of attention. So I started looking for something with more tyre. At first I thought a rigid, Frontier or Bootzipper. Then Gravel bikes came along. I dithered for a long time over what was most important. I thought tyre clearance would matter most. It didn't. It was geo. There were Gravel bikes with steep and long geo, short and slack, everything in between. I ended up with a bike that is slightly shorter, taller and slacker than my road bikes. It has relatively short CS, so still nippy and poppy. It takes up to 38mm tyres. or about 1.6 in old money. Damn near what my 90's mtb had. I realised that if 38mm wasn't enough tyre, it was probably also the wrong bike. So I don't understand Drop bar bikes that go up to or even 2.0 or bigger. That seems to defeat the purpose of each.
Its also more fun in traffic because I sit a little taller and so good for spotting in traffic. Its comfy on the road, I can enjoy the ride more because it requires less attention to the road. I can ride the drops if I want more aero. Its also fun as anything on any terrain the tyres will cope with. Which is more than you'd think. It also means I can buy a hardtail with longer, slacker geo, which will be more fun on anything the gravel bike can't cope with.
Because the typical design parameters of an MTB include much steeper terrain than that of a gravel bike.
Still doesn't define a mtb. We're a large number of the bikes sold as mtbs 10 years ago not mtbs? They might not be as good at steep riding (that having watched people mtb a large number of people on modern bikes strggiwith) but they were still fine on steep stuff.
I am not using the you can ride anything in anything but that the > 68deg is pretty bull shit. Bars and tyres have much more on an effect. That is the common theme amounts mtb
Bullshit to you yes. I wouldn’t buy an MTB with a head angle steeper than 68 though. Just not as good for me. Steep head angles are from the past. The last few years have seen MTB’s evolve in to a better tool for the job at hand. Slackening of head angles, for me, have played a significant part in that. I’d like a gravel bike to follow that trend for my end use. Your requirements may be different.
The typical MTB user doesn’t what?
include much steeper terrain than that of a gravel bike.
Whether you like it or not, the average/typical user on here (or most MTB forums TBH) is *massively* overbiked for a majority of what they do.
is *massively* overbiked
This is just the same argument that is used by gravel bikers to justify why they like being "massively underbiked"
Hey there,
I have a Nukeproof Digger Comp curly barred latest marketing tool to get you to purchase bicycles.
My comment really is that after cycling to the Green Man festival on my road bike, I found that my skinny wheeled relic of 1998 Cannondale R300 was a bit lacking in grip, braking capabilities and actually gravely trail riding. It kinda of worked but it was very dodgy at times is the word I would use to describe it.
My riding locally here is more in need of road to trail than full mountain bike and something very light for the climbs. A gravel bike works far better at this than my mountain bikes. Ironically the best mountain bike for here is a 2002 26" Rock Lobster 853 lightweight hardtail than a full sus heavier Cotic Flaremax.
So I started to look for something that was faster than a Rock lobster for the road part of the trails similar to the Cannondale, but with modern brakes, that I didn't need a man in front waving a flag to warn of impending cyclist with little, to no capability to brake 😉 Also I bike pack and these Gravel bikes seemed to work very well.
The Nukeproof has fitted the bill very well and is super easy to maintain than the mountain bikes and here at least work very well. It is no mountain bike for sure and I will still revert to the four bother mountain bikes that I have for that.
Oh I live near Bristol and on the Seven hence the climb to get to Bristol needed a light bike and something faster than my mountain bikes. They are great urban two wheeled machines for this. Will I be getting rid of my MTBs for a collection of mounatin bikes, err definitely not they have their uses which is different.
JeZ
Whether you like it or not, the average/typical user on here (or most MTB forums TBH) is *massively* overbiked for a majority of what they do.
Thats why a gravel bike, or a rigid/short travel 29er (if you don't like drops) is good for non tech off road riding.
This is just the same argument that is used by gravel bikers to justify why they like being “massively underbiked”
Only if you ride it in the wrong place or are a gluten for punishment, but then I suppose you actually have the right bike....
Thanks @jezzep and @cromolyolly for your perspectives- makes total sense along with the others who have, and love, gravel bikes. Slightly more adaptable/ practical road bike seems to be the trend.
My hope for some kind of drop bar bike, be it a CX bike, gravel bike, all road bike, whateverthelatestsubgenreofthesamethingis was for faster and more comfortable long rides on the least technical off road rides.
Happy to admit I was sucked in by the hype and I'm glad I had a bike over the weekend to get a few rides in and see where they fit in to my own preferences.
I was probably actually more disappointed when looking in to CX bikes, hoping they would offer something for some faster road riding and still be fast off road. By and large the trend looks the same as gravel bikes where the geometry is only fractionally different from the race bikes and in many cases the frames are exactly the same as the road bikes and only the build changes the genre/ definition/ use/ whatever.
By the sound of it I am about a decade late on that optimism of a CX bike being a "quiver killer" 😉 🙂
I have changed my mind on gravel bikes over the last few years. I bought one a few years ago moving from tarmac onto off road stuff for the first time in a number of years. Didn’t know what to expect. What I should have bought was a hardtail. I struggled when I encountered anything other than dirt roads.
Then I bought a nice light 29er hardtail. It was exactly what I needed to discover the natural trails I had been keen to explore. The gravel bike then gathered dust for a year.
Recently with the change in weather the slippy roots and mud and puddles on the trails I have dug out the gravel bike again. It’s great if your looking for a non technical route mixing road, dirt and gravel fire roads. Mines feels faster than the 29er on dirt roads I can get into the drops on long flat stretches and push on. It’s also fun a nice challenge on little bits of single track.
If I had to get rid of a bike it would probably be the gravel bike as the mountain bike is so much better off road. However the gravel bike has its place and I’ll be heading out on mine again today.
This is just the same argument that is used by gravel bikers to justify why they like being “massively underbiked”
From my side it's not an argument, it's merely an observation.
I don't much care if you are over or under biked.
From my side it’s not an argument, it’s merely an observation.
I didn't mean it in the pejorative sense, merely as "set of reasons to support a position" type of way. I'd observe that for most folks having a more capable bike is "more useful" than having one that is not.
Whether you like it or not, the average/typical user on here (or most MTB forums TBH) is *massively* overbiked for a majority of what they do.
That's a sweeping assumption firstly, as there are no set criteria for over or under biking.
But secondly, going down 'steep' stuff is hardly top level radical hardcore MTB. It's pretty much normal. It doesn't have to be radically fast and dramatic, but it's the kind of thing I've always done and people I've ridden with have always done.
You seem to be suggesting that most MTBers are simply mincing around easy trails all the time. This is not true in my experience.
