Cycling UK Forum

Nearholmer wrote: ↑29 Aug 2024, 8:35pm Pete75

Make yourself comfortable on the couch, close your eyes, and relax.

Now, taking all the time you need, in your own words, tell us what it is about the term “gravel bike” that evokes such negative emotions within you?

It might help to begin by recalling the first time you heard the term …….

I don't know anyone who actually cycles a lot on gravel. I have a gravel driveway and it's damned unpleasant stuff to ride on, even with a wide tyred MTB. Seems rather silly to describe a bike as being for a surface few people cycle on and certainly no one with any enjoyment.

An excellent example of Objection (d) being deployed.

rareposter wrote: ↑23 Sep 2024, 2:47pm

PH wrote: ↑23 Sep 2024, 2:37pm
(Although that riding position in the last part sets my teeth on edge, that's a stoooopid angle for a neck)..
I think it's a good thing that bikes with wider tyres, lower gears and better brakes have become fashionable. Not because they're fashionable, but because they're better bikes than the ones those riders would have bought a decade or so ago.

Careful now, you'll get accused of being an Industry Shill.

And here's a clip from the 1980's asking if mountain biking is just a fad...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j8qDwN8C0no
..er, wider tyres, low gears, better (for the time) brakes..

I still rate the 1980's with its more up right position, lots of mounting points, clearance for feet, mudguards and wide(ish) tyres, and a low top tube and low gears as steps towards the mythical 'every person bike'...
....its nice to see (some of) those concepts re-established through the gravel bike...

However in the same way that the 1990's mountain bike began to ruin the mtb design, there's always the danger, that gravel biking will go the same way... and by that I mean overly focused on the competitive side of cycling.. top tubes will get higher, riding positions more stretched, clearances will diminish and prices will rise...

.....at which point the bicycle will be reinvented again...

..star bellied sneeches.....

Now that there is UCI gravel racing, that's quite possible.

Nearholmer wrote: ↑23 Sep 2024, 4:15pm An excellent example of Objection (d) being deployed.

Perhaps you could explain what you so love about the term gravel bike? Do you ride a lot on gravel?

I suspect they're being pushed because road bike sales to new and born again cyclists have fallen off, perhaps becaus emany riders are realising they're not the most suitable bike for them or for poorly maintained UK roads. Gearing too high, tyres too narrow, bars too low, seat too hard, ride too harsh. A touring bike would have been a better choice for many of them. So called gravel bikes are being pushed as an alternative to road bikes, probably to try and keep sales up. I fail to see what the things offer for an average rider that something like a Galaxy or a Spa tourer doesn't. It's an invention of marketing men.

Post script....

...the bicycle gets reinvented, not for the benefit of those who already own bikes, but to attract new customers....

..I think my Dad was sort of disappointed when as a spotty teenager I chose a mountain bike rather than a racer... certainly the wider tyres and more up right position appealed to me... and without the mountain bike appearing in my life, I still may be some sort of petrol head, perhaps even voting for reform against their idea of zero carbon emissions....

...and I strongly suspect that there are those who are now riding, who wouldn't be riding, if gravel bikes hadn't come onto the scene...

..however we're always in the middle of something- not at the end, and I very much look forward to reading posts from gravel bike riders, when the next design of bicycle crashes like a wave onto society, something like 'I don't know why people are buying these new pedal powered hover bikes, you could ride that terrain on a mid 2020's gravel bike... its all a sales gimmick'...

So called gravel bikes are being pushed as an alternative to road bikes, probably to try and keep sales up

A perfect example of Objection (c).

For most of the rest, mostly see my previous to Matheus. It’s not that I love the term, it’s simply that I’m comfortable with it, it doesn’t send me into paroxysms of irritation as it seems to with some.

TBH, I think that the comparison with an out of production bike like a Galaxy, or a Spa tourer is pretty much irrelevant, since they aren’t things that most roadies or MTBers who fancy some lighter off-roading have hanging in their sheds, or have even heard of (Spa do indeed make some bikes that are very suitable for various sub-forms of what is now termed ‘gravel’, very good value for money, but very few people know of the brand). When a person thinks about getting into ‘gravel’, they are faced with a huge choice of bikes that fit the general bill, at a great range of prices, with varying specifications, from very well known and easily accessible brands, so they are more likely to go for those. Halfords have >500 shops selling the very popular Boardman ADV8.9, often recommended as the entry gravel bike, for instance; Spa have one shop.

cycle tramp wrote: ↑23 Sep 2024, 5:01pm .....at which point the bicycle will be reinvented again...

Yes, that's how it goes. But each reinvention brings something new and if it's worthwhile, it remains when fashion moves on. MTB sport did go off in it's own direction, but it didn't take everything with it. Many of the most popular mainstream utility bikes, those that have been best sellers over the last thirty years, like the Carrera Subway, have their origins in that 80's MTB fad. Even those less mainstream, like half the Surly range, or your own frame, share some of those roots.
If someone doesn't like a Gravel bike because the tyres are too wide, or the gearing too high, or the shifting to complex, or the frame isn't re-cyclable, or the riding position too aggressive, or tubeless hassle... then fine, we might disagree and have a bit of banter to go with it, but these are differences of opinion, based on the bike. If someone doesn't like them because of the silly name, or the fashion, or because they think the RSF were doing the same years ago, or the image, or the accessories that go with riding them, or their association with poncy coffee, then it's not really a cycling discussion at all.
I don't have a Gravel bike, it's unlikely I ever will, I have no interest in getting one. Yet I've benefited from this reinvention, wider faster tyres for one thing, some cycle specific casual clothing, some new routes I'd like to do, a different attitude to off road in Audax, wider luggage choice. I don't care what someone tells me is and isn't new, or what is merely an evolution, it wasn't available a short while ago, it is now, that's new to me.

pete75 wrote: ↑23 Sep 2024, 5:35pm I fail to see what the things offer for an average rider that something like a Galaxy or a Spa tourer doesn't. It's an invention of marketing men.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Spa Elan outsold the Tourer. I know they don't call it a Gravel bike, but it shares more in common with one than it does with a Galaxy.
Did you read CJ's My Bike article in Cycle a while back? The CTC ex Technical Officer explained why he'd chosen to buy a Planet X Carbon gravel bike for riding around the Peak District (Where there's not much gravel). I can't remember all the details, but I'm pretty sure being a victim of marketing wasn't one of them.

pete75 wrote: ↑23 Sep 2024, 5:35pm It's an invention of marketing men.

OK, I'll bite. Why is that a bad thing?

Most [products] are marketed in some way shape or form, even touring bikes or kids bikes. So why should a "gravel bike" be any different and why is that somehow bad but a tourer is somehow good?

I mean, the crux of your argument is that because a Dawes Galaxy could do some of the same terrain, that all innovation, marketing, research, development, improvement etc should just have stopped right there cos the Galaxy existed?

"It was invented to boost sales" seems a strange reason for opposition in a thread that started by bewailing the demise of the cycle trade.

I’m ever-fairly-deaf both to the blandishments of marketers, and to those who complain about the marketing of bikes, the first because listening too much is a quick route to penury and the workhouse, the second because marketing arrived in the cycling world about a millisecond after the first bike, and has been part and parcel of it ever since. Just look at all those wonderful examples of commercial art devoted to telling fibs about bikes in the 1890s if you doubt me.

In this one, the female cyclist seems to have chosen freedom over matrimonial shackles, and is unusually demurely dressed by the standards of French bike adverts:

I can say for certain that I do not understand what's happening to the cycle trade. I've just been searching for a normal everyday bicycle component of a reasonable quality and have failed. What has happened? Gravel bikes north of a couple of £k everywhere I look but not a solitary decent quality 27.0 polished silver seatpost to be found unless I import it from Japan.

I declare the cycle trade officially broken

oaklec wrote: ↑23 Sep 2024, 7:44pm I look but not a solitary decent quality 27.0 polished silver seatpost to be found unless I import it from Japan.

The preference for black everything predates gravel bikes by at least a decade, though as someone who also like shiny silver I feel your pain.
There's this one, might not be to your taste but it's a quality make
https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/seat-posts/ ... er-350-mm/
Or if you can manage with a shorter 250mm post there's a nice SOMA one from the same supplier

Nearholmer wrote: ↑23 Sep 2024, 7:32pm In this one, the female cyclist seems to have chosen freedom over matrimonial shackles, and is unusually demurely dressed by the standards of French bike adverts:

That'll show that Danny MacAskill that he didn't invent urban stunt riding (Not that he ever claimed he did)