Cycling UK Forum

I'm sure many people will say it doesn't affect them like that, but I think it does me. I guess it depends as well on recovery time etc as well. In some ways I am fairly fit but I also have low level ME/CFS and am asthmatic which means if I push too hard, my performance/potential just drops away

In terms of walking hills (like the tourers yesterday did) I do find that I see them as a challenge to climb but that one fairly big hill could knock 5-10m from my overall riding capacity. It's not necessarily so for everyone, but I guess know your limits and how best you work as a rider

I'm welsh, it's the oratory urge. Yes you're right.
And apologies to the OP for this thread drift

I went out on a 60 mile bike ride today. About 20 miles in, I zipped past two heavily laden cycle tourists pushing their bikes up a not terribly steep hill and thought no more of it. I pushed on at a decent pace for about 5 miles and stopped for a 2 minute sit and contemplate in the garden of remembrance at Aberfan and then pushed on.

At the next pinch gate, they had caught me up. Slightly taken aback, I sped off again and pushed on hard. So hard that I needed a cup of tea and a piece of cake. Just as I was pouring my tea, the couple passed the tearooms pushing their bikes up the steep hill. After a cuppa and a slab of cake, I pushed on and caught them, chatted to them for a while and passed them as they were cycling too slowly for me.

A few miles on, I had to stop as it was clear that my front tyre was soft. Another cyclist stopped to lend me her pump and I ended up nipping across the road to the garage who used their compressor to pump it up for me. By this point the two had passed me again.

Needless to say I pushed on again and really sped up. It took me a mile to pass the couple and after that point I did not see them again.

My long winded point is that I do wonder whether a steady pace means more than ultimate fitness?

johncarnie wrote:

graymee wrote:I would have been inclined to hold my ground, stopping if necessary (as a last resort) to force them to change course however I wasn't in the situation you were in.

They were going too fast and did not see me until they were on top of me. If we had crashed would it have been a MAMAFIL?

Maybe a MAMAFAIL?

Meic, I was referring to times when I have gone down through the gears to pick through a queue of waiting cars and got to the ASL and stayed in a low gear to ensure I could get away quickly from the lights. A few times this has been on a hill too. The right hand stubby lever (ie shorter one on the left of the hood) is very quick to operate to go back up through the gears, but if accelerating hard I find it hard to get back up through the gears fast enough to moderate my cadence. At times like that I do wish I could go up two at a time or that gears were further apart (perhaps fewer than 9?). I think my Clubman has Sora.

I'm sure one answer would be to alter my riding style but when commuting I feel much safer getting away quickly, and it isn't a big deal.

Isn't the way of life that if you want a Pashley Guvnor but then buy something else to be more sensible, you will be left wishing you had bought the Pashley

RickH wrote:

Claireysmurf wrote:... Electronic derailleurs could also make multiple hub gears a more mainstream alternative too?

But they'll probably be controlled by electronics too!

gah

A few years ago, I had a lousy day in work then I had a terrible commute home (27 miles from south west london to nw kent) so I treated myself to a luvverly curry from a takeaway. I poured myself a huge whiskey and sat down with the tray on my lap to enjoy. After only a bite, the phone rang and so I got up to answer it and in doing i knocked the tray and it catapulted through the air and deposited the contents on the new carpet. Result? Lost whiskey, ruined meal and a stain that never left the carpet

I agree that a bike that has electronics seems perverse. However, cars adopted electronic parts for ignition and fuelling over 30 years ago so it seems inevitable. The key to the Di2 being hard to swallow at the moment is cost. The articles I have read suggest that one charge is enough for the Tour de France and so I am not sure that this is so bad. Now the technology is out there, we can surely expect the cost to fall exponentially over the next few years in the way that most electrickery does and so become widespread on a lot of bikes.
This suggests to me that performance oriented bikes will adopt it readily and that there may need to be resistance from touring cyclists to ensure that things stay mechanical unless the durability argument is well and truly answered.
Modern wiring looms for cars tend to integrate many functions into single wires and be decoded by chips. Perhaps this will mark the advent of other functions run from a central battery source or hub dynamo including ipod/phone/satnav charging, lights and perhaps even anti-lock brakes.
ABS is surely fairly simple to provide on a push bike (is it available already?) with wheel speed sensors and servos and perhaps is necessary for disc braked bikes?
In terms of the (un)acceptability of this, it may provoke more of a divergence between cutting edge and retro (e.g. Pashley) bikes.
Electronic derailleurs could also make multiple hub gears a more mainstream alternative too?

I'm sometimes a MAFIL then but really do aspire to their greatness (if not their obvious lack of awareness)

hubgearfreak wrote:

Claireysmurf wrote: I am struck by how many things in modern life are about marketing not substance and it is so difficult to find true quality.

as for replacing your current bike - why bother if it's as good as you describe it below?

Claireysmurf wrote: I have a year old Dawes Clubman (audax/road bike) that works fairly well for me. The gears work well, the frame is relatively light and it feels quick.

Maybe because I expected to have to pay a lot more than I did for the bike and the bits I have changed (<£600 so far for a year old bike, new Brooks B17, rack, clipless pedals, adjustable stem raiser)?

My STI change one gear at a time but I tend to negate that at times by repeatedly pressing the shifters.

As to whether my own bike is good enough, I don't think I wanted the thread to ever be about my bike especially. I am struck by how many things in modern life are about marketing not substance and it is so difficult to find true quality. There is a big thread elsewhere about carbon and whilst this is high performance and perhaps more durable than I may imagine but is this marketing led?

Funny you should mention pulse rate - my cycling buddy managed a few of the hills that I pulled up on yesterday and he hit 99% of maximum heart rate (in his case 183bpm). We neither of us had a good cycling day as both felt tired; the headwinds and hayfever certainly didn't help me.
I must remember to wear my heart rate monitor but normally if i do 150 miles in a week it is mainly commuting (maybe 80 miles over 6 days) with a couple of leisure rides (remaining 70 miles). About 20% of the commuting I would count as quick (maybe managing 20 mph for a mile or two at a time).
Typically my speeds would probably be 14mph on the flat but on my last long solo ride I noticed I did manage a 1:56 mile where there was a biggish downhill section.

I was chatting to a friend yesterday about the never ending increase in number of gears. Are the new 10 and 11 speeds typically just more closely packed ratios or do they offer a broader spread when compared with similar older bikes? I have a 9 speed cassette on my Clubman and if I have had to drop down to a low gear for traffic lights (perhaps on a hill), it can feel hard work accelerating and changing rapidly through the gears using my STI changers (surely non indexed changers would be much quicker in this instance?).