Community > Muppets Threads! (And Anything Else)
What is a "Gravel" bike really ?
PH:
--- Quote from: JohnR on April 08, 2022, 05:12:55 pm ---So it's less about bike and more about tyres. Having the clearance in the frame / forks to fit suitable tyres may be the key feature.
--- End quote ---
Yes mostly, if you gave a designer a road bike and asked them to make something with similar characteristics, but able to accommodate wider tyres and with some off road capability, the typical gravel bike is what you'd get. Other differences to the frame - the BB has come up a bit to increase ground clearance, front centers are longer to maintain toe/tyre clearance (Though not always by enough) and there's usually better fittings for luggage. Chainstays might be a littlie longer, of shaped, to avoid heel strike. The important stuff like steering geometry is pretty much identical, so they still wouldn't be my first choice. Seat angles have also remained pretty constant, another thing that would rule them off my wishlist.
Then of course there's the stuff other than the frame that makes a bike, particularly the gearing, not so long ago people were mocked for having more than a 26T cassette, now people brag about being able to run twice that, sometimes I'm sure they're the same people. Bar shapes - all sorts of experimentation going on.
Some of the stuff I like, some I don't, I appreciate having choice and as I said upthread there's plenty at the moment (Whether any of it is actually in stock is another matter)
Danneaux:
The best summation of what makes a gravel bike (versus road bike) I've found is here...
https://www.theproscloset.com/blogs/news/road-bikes-vs-gravel-bikes-6-key-differences?utm_content=tribikes300&gclid=CjwKCAjwur-SBhB6EiwA5sKtjgGwJHQ_FlY9qVWf4gtT3sM0Y6PkWMH119fidbxpzUIYE6i2gb06GxoC7VUQAvD_BwE
As a hobbyist framebuilder, I'm interested in the geometry used for gravel bikes, particularly trail. Some makers (Salsa with the Warbird series) favor high trail (high 60mms-low 70mms) while other makers prefer to end up with more neutral figures in the upper 50s. IT seems to be all over the map and so far "unsettled law" with one exception: From that I can see, there are very few gravel bikes made with low-trail geometry for obvious reasons*.
Since the topic of luggage was mentioned, this article has an interesting take on gravel vs bikepacking bikes...
https://www.welovecycling.com/wide/2021/01/08/bikepacking-bikes-the-difference-between-gravel-and-proper-bikepacking/
I inherited my late father's mid-'80s tourer, identical to mine which is setup for road touring. I assembled his in a way that favors riding on gravel so it is my new "gravel" bike. It is the same bike, but the difference is different wheels, wider tires, fewer racks and lighter weight as a result. These differences have made for a really noticeable difference between the bikes and the gravel bike is better suited for riding on loose, rougher surfaces unladen. However, it is wise to keep in mind there's different kinds of gravel. A fresh pour of 3/4-minus is different from pea gravel, washboard, sub-ballast and heavy ballast. While my "gravel" bike works superbly on "groomed"/good/benign gravel roads even at speed on it 39mm tires, it is no match for the heavily ballasted logging roads my Nomad handles so superbly. It is a matter of frame geometry, tire section width, wheel diameter and...for me, the presence of a long-travel suspension seatpost. For nearly any rough surface, my Nomad (and my dedicated Enduro-Allroad) are "better" gravel bikes than my faux gravel bike because of their features are all optimized for the task.
Best,
Dan.
*EDIT: I momentarily and completely forgot about the bikes championed by Jan Heine of the "new" Rene Herse. He has had considerable good luck riding bikes with low-trail geometry in all sorts of gravel and rough surfaces and in fact, has built much of his company's success on that very thing.
Danneaux:
--- Quote ---Some of the stuff I like, some I don't, I appreciate having choice and as I said upthread there's plenty at the moment (Whether any of it is actually in stock is another matter)
--- End quote ---
True, wise words in my view. :)
Best,
Dan.
mickeg:
Several years ago a bike shop salesman was telling me that the next big thing was the new 27.5 inch wheel size, it was faster and lighter than other run of the mill tires sizes, and it was brand new. He had never heard of 650b. And he was not very interested in talking to me when I told him that 650b was an older tire size that a lot of French utility bikes had.
I know some riders that like to show off that they have bought the best latest fads. One of them had cracked his carbon frame on his travel bike, needed a new bike. Got the latest thing, a gravel bike, but with aluminum frame. (I think he downgraded from carbon to aluminum because he got his wife one too, thus the cost of two bikes.) Another one of that group saw it and had to get one too, but his new gravel bike was more upscale with a nicer paint job on his carbon frame. And another one could not be left out of the conversation so he had to get carbon wheels for his new carbon gravel bike. The marketers really scored a bullseye with that marketing pitch. These guys used to only ride on 23 or 25mm tires. One of those guys put 28mm tires on his gravel bike, I think he was less sold on the wide tires thing than the others.
That said, I think that the manufacturers had finally realized that there were some people out there that wanted to buy expensive bikes that had wider tires, so needed to come up with a marketing pitch. I built up my first touring bike in 2004, put 37mm tires on it. People laughed at my balloon tires (one of my friends called them balloon tires), but tires of that width are more mainstream these days, and they were becoming more mainstream before gravel became a thing.
I am not really sure if the marketing pitch revolving around 1X drivetrains and gravel bikes were somehow related or if it was only coincidence that they happened at about the same time. But, that might be part of it too. The manufacturers could charge as much for a 1X system as a 2X system, but it cost less to make and a lot less to assemble and adjust when selling the new bike. And from a component manufacturer perspective, the 1x systems are better for another reason, those huge cassettes sell for a fortune when you need a new one.
mickeg:
--- Quote from: Danneaux on April 08, 2022, 06:33:32 pm ---The best summation of what makes a gravel bike (versus road bike) I've found is here...
https://www.theproscloset.com/blogs/news/road-bikes-vs-gravel-bikes-6-key-differences?utm_content=tribikes300&gclid=CjwKCAjwur-SBhB6EiwA5sKtjgGwJHQ_FlY9qVWf4gtT3sM0Y6PkWMH119fidbxpzUIYE6i2gb06GxoC7VUQAvD_BwE
...
--- End quote ---
That comparison of road vs gravel bikes, that indicated that gravel has a more upright posture. I had not seen that written before, but that makes sense, in part because I think a lot of people that bought road bikes don't like leaning that far forward but they do not want to put a higher stem on their road bikes, thus they can buy a gravel bike and get the posture that they want without people commenting that they are not as aero.
I on the other hand bought a 35 degree stem for my road bike very soon after I bought the bike. It has the same posture as my touring bikes and rando bike.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version