Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - My New Rando/Long Distance Bike

196220

I have only taken it for a couple of short spins but it feels really nice so far. Here is how it is built up:
56cm Gunnar Sport frame and fork with Chris King headset
Ksyrium Elite Wheels with Conti GP 4 Season 700x28 tires
Shimano Ultegra 6703 derailleurs with Shimano Dura Ace 7800 down tube shifters
Shimano 105 5703 crankset (50/39/30) with Shimano A520 pedals
Shimano R650 regular reach brakes with Cane Creek SCR5 levers
Velo Orange handlebar, stem and seatpost
WTB Rocket V saddle

Very nice and almost exactly my dream build.

Very nice and almost exactly my dream build.

Thanks. My idea was to have an updated classic balancing cost with function. I went with a 105 crank because it uses more standard chainrings than the ultegra and higher cranks. The fact that it's $100 cheaper was a bonus. I chose the cane creek levers because they have a quick release button on them which will allow me to get wider tires out when used in conjunction with the QR levers on the brakes. It was a lot of fun gathering the parts while the frame was being built. I can't speak highly enough of the whole Gunnar/Waterford organization. They a very responsive to their customers and delivered the frame sooner than promised.

those gunnar sports are great riding bikes. my shop built one up and MAN is that a great riding bike. needs some fenders though :D.

those gunnar sports are great riding bikes. my shop built one up and MAN is that a great riding bike. needs some fenders though :D.

I haven't quite gotten my head wrapped around fenders yet. I have been riding 30 years and that is probably my biggest fault. I just don't like the way they look.

This is my dream bike as well. I rode a demo from the LBS & it was so smooth. I like your build specs. What are your rear cogs? I am planning to order the Waterford raked fork. I can't yet decide between bar cons or STIs. Why did you go with down tube shifters?

Love the look of the sloped top tube.

You are going to love it.

This is my dream bike as well. I rode a demo from the LBS & it was so smooth. I like your build specs. What are your rear cogs? I am planning to order the Waterford raked fork. I can't yet decide between bar cons or STIs. Why did you go with down tube shifters?

Love the look of the sloped top tube.

This wheelset has an 11-23 cassette. I have another set of Elites with Conti Top Contact 700x32 tires and a 12-27 cassette. I will use this set when things are a little hillier or dirt/gravel riding.
I went with down tube shifters because they are, in my opinion, the simplest best shifting system made. The lack of cable housing makes them very crisp and responsive and they will work with about any wheel in friction mode. I plan on riding in areas where there may not be a bike shop and there is very little you can do if an STI lever craps out on you in the middle of nowhere.

This wheelset has an 11-23 cassette. I have another set of Elites with Conti Top Contact 700x32 tires and a 12-27 cassette. I will use this set when things are a little hillier or dirt/gravel riding.
I went with down tube shifters because they are, in my opinion, the simplest best shifting system made. The lack of cable housing makes them very crisp and responsive and they will work with about any wheel in friction mode. I plan on riding in areas where there may not be a bike shop and there is very little you can do if an STI lever craps out on you in the middle of nowhere.

I am also currently using a 50/39/30 coupled with 12/25 and have needed more gears for some of the hillier rides. That 12-27 may be the trick.

I am also currently using a 50/39/30 coupled with 12/25 and have needed more gears for some of the hillier rides. That 12-27 may be the trick.

Another option that I have on another bike a 26 tooth small ring coupled with a 12x27. That will get you up a lot of hills.

Nice looking bike.....enjoy...:thumb:

I haven't quite gotten my head wrapped around fenders yet. I have been riding 30 years and that is probably my biggest fault. I just don't like the way they look.

Fenders are great. The only complaint I've ever had with them is that the silver fenders reflect the sun into my eyes when they are aligned just so.

It's a pretty bike and I really hope you enjoy it. Using big tires is a good idea. Everything about the compact frame design and the straight fork work against a comfortable ride.

A regular diamond frame bike may ride just as well or better on a 25mm tire.

Sorry about that - but its the truth.

Sorry about that - but its the truth.

Richard has a thing about "the truth," as he knows it .

Would like to have a Gunnar Sport myself. Love the color.

Richard has a thing about "the truth," as he knows it .

Yeah, i have been at this long enough to know what works and I also know about some peoples' version of the truth. Some people are just miserable and aren't happy unless they are raining on someone's parade.

Fenders are great. The only complaint I've ever had with them is that the silver fenders reflect the sun into my eyes when they are aligned just so.

They also rattle. Plenty of noise on gravel roads. They never seem to be completely aligned over the tires. I'll probably get them anyway.

It's a pretty bike and I really hope you enjoy it. Using big tires is a good idea. Everything about the compact frame design and the straight fork work against a comfortable ride.

A regular diamond frame bike may ride just as well or better on a 25mm tire.

Sorry about that - but its the truth.

I do not disagree......but, I just rode a Gunnar Sport demo bike, with the same set up, for 23 miles. The ride was at least 20% less harsh than my Trek 1600 with aluminum frame & carbon fork. It was very comfortable. Add a Waterford raked fork & some 28's........luxury.

Very nice. But why the low spoke count wheels?

I do not disagree......but, I just rode a Gunnar Sport demo bike, with the same set up, for 23 miles. The ride was at least 20% less harsh than my Trek 1600 with aluminum frame & carbon fork. It was very comfortable. Add a Waterford raked fork & some 28's........luxury.

That's my opinion, I've had a Sport for years.

I own a Gunnar Roadie as well and used it to ride 253 miles in 12 hours, back in 2003. But I assembled my Roadie using a Kestral carbon fork with some bend.

As I said, I like the bike, and tough guys can ride whatever bike they want. But there's reasoning why bikes are manufactured with diamond frames and bends in their forks. These factors contribute to a comfortable ride.

Hence my previous comment. If you post pictures that call "sport bikes" or "club bikes" appropriate for Randonneuring then I'll make another "comment". It's called the truth -deal with it.

196368

I own a Gunnar Roadie as well and used it to ride 253 miles in 12 hours, back in 2003. But I assembled my Roadie using a Kestral carbon fork with some bend.

As I said, I like the bike, and tough guys can ride whatever bike they want. But there's reasoning why bikes are manufactured with diamond frames and bends in their forks. These factors contribute to a comfortable ride.

Hence my previous comment. If you post pictures that call "sport bikes" or "club bikes" appropriate for Randonneuring then I'll make another "comment". It's called the truth -deal with it.

196368

Comparing a Sport and a Roadie? These models are not the same.

Wheelbase: Roadie 988mm, Sport 1011mm
Head-tube angle: Roadie 73.5, Sport 72.5
Chain-stay: Roadie 410mm, Sport 425mm

The proclamation that a Diamond frame is always better than a semi-compact frame is not true either. There are plenty of uncomfortable bikes, including the old-school designs.

I’m always interested to see how limited a view of “the truth” a person selects, when discussing “the truth.”

I love the bike Barrettcsv! The look of that fork is one of my favorite things about the sport (have not ridden it). Very nice paint and build as well. You are going to love it. I am more than a little jealous.

Very nice. But why the low spoke count wheels?

I am new to randoneuring so I will only be doing 200 or 300k rides for at least this year so I won't be carrying a lot of stuff. These wheels are amazingly strong for their weight. I have ridden these wheels in cyclocross and numerous off road excursions. As I see the need, I can always put on heavier wheels. That is the great thing about a bike, none of the parts are welded on and can be changed when I want. Just like the discussion in this thread about the fork. If I don't like the fork down the road, I can change it. People on here act like once a bike is built, you can't ever change anything. I have a bunch of bikes and I can mix and match as conditions require.

[QUOTE=Pb_Okole;12456190] That is the great thing about a bike, none of the parts are welded on and can be changed when I want. Just like the discussion in this thread about the fork. If I don't like the fork down the road, I can change it. People on here act like once a bike is built, you can't ever change anything. QUOTE]

I find the same thing in reading reviews about bikes that focus on the components as a make-or-break issue. I concede that compoments contribute toward the collective desireability or applicability of a given frame toward a given task, but most bikes really come down the frame since components are replaceable.

As I see the need, I can always put on heavier wheels....People on here act like once a bike is built, you can't ever change anything. I have a bunch of bikes and I can mix and match as conditions require.

Only some people act that way, I was just curious.;)

My personal view regarding my wheels for long distance rides, is that if I break a spoke, I want enough spokes on the wheel so that I can adjust the tension on the adjacent spokes and keep going. That's instead of dismantlement things to fix it right.:) really it's more of a convenience issue when 100+ miles from home unsupported.

But I hear you about some people. For example, I have a couple bikes with which I've carried 3-7# in a front bag. They seem to handle very well with those loads, even steadier than my pretty well mannered road bike without a bag.

Imagine my surprise when I learned from the internet experts that because the geometry is "high trail" it doesn't handle a front load well. :eek: :rolleyes:

Hence my previous comment. If you post pictures that call "sport bikes" or "club bikes" appropriate for Randonneuring then I'll make another "comment". It's called the truth -deal with it.

If the OP doesn't complete the brevets he enters due to comfort issues you have grounds to be irritating and point out to him the flaws in his equipment choices as you see them. If he completes the rides happily and comes back for more in 2012 on the same bike than your truth doesn't match his reality and you ought to keep your comments to yourself.

Several folks on last weekend's brevet rode bikes that I would consider unsuitable for randonneering, but I keep my criticisms to myself since they finished the event before me!

Everything about the compact frame design and the straight fork work against a comfortable ride.

A straight fork is likely just as compliant as a curved fork. I certainly can't tell the difference. Same goes for the compact frame. If someone hopes for significant vertical compliance out of a steel frame, they are looking to the wrong components.

A straight fork is likely just as compliant as a curved fork. I certainly can't tell the difference. Same goes for the compact frame. If someone hopes for significant vertical compliance out of a steel frame, they are looking to the wrong components.

A properly designed steel fork can offer significant compliance vertically and still steer precisely. Having said that it doesn't mean a bike with straight fork will be awful to ride - particularly with a good choice of supple tires.

Define "properly designed fork."

Most "straight" steel forks have 7 degree crowns. That means that the entire length of the fork blade is offset from the centerline of the steerer. I'm leaving out some steps, but this means that more of the fork blade is involved in any elastic bending due to road irregularities. The blade at the end has less of a bending moment on it than it would if it were bent, so this cancels out. Rakes being approximately equal, of course.

I think straight forks and compact frames are at least a little awkward looking, but I'm riding a frame of that description, and I find it very comfortable.

Ok, I don't think we can say (and granted, you didn't) "all straight forks are as compliant as any curved fork." Neither can we say "all curved forks are more compliant than any straight fork."

But if you think about the design of curved versus straight, you'll see the curved fork has more ways to bend than the straight.

Obviously, I can't begin to explain nor understand all the complex comments following my remarks. If someone wants to say their bike is "rando" or long distance ready - I really don't care.

Clearly, most of you would rather defend others "feelings" than remain objective in discussing bicycle equipment. (or offer true BS as technical data)

Perhaps all I really wanted to do is brag about how cool my modified Gunnar worked out for me. And how I had tried the bike with the "other style fork" and found it too "responsive" - ah harsh, for long distance cycling. But hey, my experience is worth nothing to most of you.

Let it be.

I own a Gunnar Roadie as well and used it to ride 253 miles in 12 hours, back in 2003. But I assembled my Roadie using a Kestral carbon fork with some bend.

As I said, I like the bike, and tough guys can ride whatever bike they want. But there's reasoning why bikes are manufactured with diamond frames and bends in their forks. These factors contribute to a comfortable ride.

Hence my previous comment. If you post pictures that call "sport bikes" or "club bikes" appropriate for Randonneuring then I'll make another "comment". It's called the truth -deal with it.

196368

Richard,

If you would review your original comment, you would not find any kind of a reasonable discussion of factual information. Even your stated opinion is somewhat vague: “But there's reasoning why bikes are manufactured with diamond frames and bends in their forks. These factors contribute to a comfortable ride.”

There are many factors that contribute to the design of a quality bicycle. Whether a bike has a sloping top-tube, or not, is of very little consequence. I actually am far more comfortable on a modern compact frame and take full advantage of the longer virtual top-tube and taller head-tube available in a larger sized compact frame.

Is a well engineered and perfectly fabricated curved fork better than some straight blade forks? Please take the time to explain why.

Please keep in mind that anyone can make all kinds of claims and state any opinion on the internet. Also, no-one really knows who anyone is. “Richard Cranium”?

Why not just start a thread to explain your opinion (on any topic)?

Clearly, most of you would rather defend others "feelings" than remain objective in discussing bicycle equipment. (or offer true BS as technical data)
nobody, including you or me, has provided any objective data. It doesn't really matter to me, because if I had objective data I wouldn't really know what to do with it. That's a fairly significant problem with data. Experience is tainted with our preconceptions and so has questionable value in this type of discussion. There are a lot of very experienced randonneurs, and just citing one's own experience as gospel and getting all upset when other people's experience is not the same is not adding to the conversation. If the recent past is any measure, out of the top 100 PBP finishers this year the majority will be riding compact frames with straight forks. Fit is primary, then tires, everything else is noise.

Richard,

...Also, no-one really knows who anyone is. “Richard Cranium”

From various comments he has made, I gather that Mr. Cranium is from MO or IL. Some while back, I searched the RUSA database for members named Richard from those states, and none that I could find has much randonneuring experience. Maybe Richard is not his real name, of course. Certainly, Mr. Cranium has never provided any objective evidence whatsoever to justify his claims to expertise. Maybe he's an 85-year-old wannabe racer who has never even owned a bicycle? Provide a URL to some published race results, or your real name or RUSA #, and maybe you'll gain some credibility.

FWIW, I'm of the opinion that curved forks absorb road shock better than straight forks, based in part on conversations with Richard Schwinn when I was having my Gunnar built before the last PBP. He thought that for a really long event like that, I would be happier with a curved fork because it would absorb vibration better. On the other hand, the curved fork was a several-hundred-dollar upgrade, so maybe his views were not entirely unbiased. Anyway, a curved fork is designed to bend along its length to absorb shocks, while it seems like a straight fork will have most of its bending at the crown. Most of the shock force would seem likely to transmit right along the fork, rather than bending the fork near the tip.

Nick Bull, RUSA #2931 (Hey, I just noticed I'm less than 400Km away from 30K Km!)

Obviously, I can't begin to explain nor understand all the complex comments following my remarks. If someone wants to say their bike is "rando" or long distance ready - I really don't care.\

Cool - than don't tell someone that their new bike isn't appropriate for brevets when there are lots of folks riding along quite happily on similar rigs during those events. If the OP had been soliciting opinions on a new rando bike he was buying and wanted some feedback on a few choices your comments would have been appropriate to steer him one way or the other, but as the bike is bought you just come off as a jerk trying to make him feel bad.

When your friend rides up his shinny new bike you say "...sweet bike!... let's go for a ride.." not..."...oh I see you went for the 32mm tires and oversized tubing...ya that's going to be 23.5% rougher on the 200K next weekend than the 38mm tires I would have picked and besides it looks like you only have 6.4mm fender clearance for the rear tire and really I feel 8.2mm is the minimum..."...:twitchy::twitchy::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Wow, when I posted a picture of my new bike, I certainly didn't anticipate such lively debate. Coming from almost 30 years on racing bikes, this bike is very different from my norm. I am sorry if I ruffled any feathers by calling it a Rando bike. I had no idea that the randoneur crowd could be as bigoted and bombastic as the road racing crowd I am used to. I had always heard the rando crowd was much mellower. I guess it takes all kinds. Thankfully, Mr. Head (may I call you Dick?) has eloquently and effectively shown me the error of my ways. Should I still endeavor to try some brevets in the St Louis area this season, I will be sure to point out to all that I realize that my bike is an ill equipped, straight forked, death machine from hell and apologize for soiling their august event. ;) :thumb:

Wow, when I posted a picture of my new bike, I certainly didn't anticipate such lively debate. Coming from almost 30 years on racing bikes, this bike is very different from my norm. I am sorry if I ruffled any feathers by calling it a Rando bike. I had no idea that the randoneur crowd could be as bigoted and bombastic as the road racing crowd I am used to. I had always heard the rando crowd was much mellower. I guess it takes all kinds. Thankfully, Mr. Head (may I call you Dick?) has eloquently and effectively shown me the error of my ways. Should I still endeavor to try some brevets in the St Louis area this season, I will be sure to point out to all that I realize that my bike is an ill equipped, straight forked, death machine from hell and apologize for soiling their august event. ;) :thumb:

I think you already made the most important point in this thread: If you find that there's actually ever a need to change equipment, you can always do so. The Gunnar is very adaptable. Meanwhile, if your experience with the Gunnar ends up being anything like mine, you'll really enjoy riding it. Good luck with the brevets, if you decide to go ride some.

Nick

I think you already made the most important point in this thread: If you find that there's actually ever a need to change equipment, you can always do so. The Gunnar is very adaptable. Meanwhile, if your experience with the Gunnar ends up being anything like mine, you'll really enjoy riding it. Good luck with the brevets, if you decide to go ride some.

Nick

The few times I have been able to ride it have been very nice. It feels like a mellower version of my Merckx MX Leader. A few years ago, some friends and I did 200k and 300k rides on consecutive days and we were on racing bikes. I felt that this bike would be a good transition into the randoneuring world. I guess the jury is still out on that.

Thankfully, Mr. Head (may I call you Dick?) has eloquently and effectively shown me the error of my ways. Should I still endeavor to try some brevets in the St Louis area this season, I will be sure to point out to all that I realize that my bike is an ill equipped, straight forked, death machine from hell and apologize for soiling their august event. ;) :thumb:Hey - I'm glad you are big enough to respect my insightful comments.

You should understand that I am old and stupid - not knowing about such things as "forks" and "compact" frames. So when I see some one using terms like "rando" in a forum titled "long distance" - my silly brain concluded it meant we were talking about bicycling long distances on equipment designed for such use.

Silly me, but I digress. And as I first noted, I hope you are happy with your new ride.

Define "properly designed fork."

Most "straight" steel forks have 7 degree crowns. That means that the entire length of the fork blade is offset from the centerline of the steerer. I'm leaving out some steps, but this means that more of the fork blade is involved in any elastic bending due to road irregularities. The blade at the end has less of a bending moment on it than it would if it were bent, so this cancels out. Rakes being approximately equal, of course.

I think straight forks and compact frames are at least a little awkward looking, but I'm riding a frame of that description, and I find it very comfortable.

Yeah, this is kind of interesting. Most people would look at a curved fork and say, "okay that looks like it would flex, because of the curve."

However, when you're riding along and hit a bump, that force is transmitted not towards you, but straight up. So as long as the 'straight' fork is not actually perpendicular to the road surface, you would surely get a similar effect. Maybe even more effectively, since as you say, more of the fork gets involved.

I don't really know about such things, not being an engineer, but I do make lots of stuff out of metal and this makes sense to me. Also, guys who make motorbikes are interested in all this, there is much literature in that area regarding these forces.

On straight vs curved forks:

I struggle to see any difference in how they would perform, given equal head angle and offset values. If you think of the fork as a spring, then it doesn't really matter whether it's curved or not. The whole length of the spring gets involved.

Other factors, like the diameter of the fork's tubing (and how it varies along the length of the fork) would have a far greater impact.

Nice color.

Wow, when I posted a picture of my new bike, I certainly didn't anticipate such lively debate. Coming from almost 30 years on racing bikes, this bike is very different from my norm. I am sorry if I ruffled any feathers by calling it a Rando bike. I had no idea that the randoneur crowd could be as bigoted and bombastic as the road racing crowd I am used to. I had always heard the rando crowd was much mellower. I guess it takes all kinds. Thankfully, Mr. Head (may I call you Dick?) has eloquently and effectively shown me the error of my ways. Should I still endeavor to try some brevets in the St Louis area this season, I will be sure to point out to all that I realize that my bike is an ill equipped, straight forked, death machine from hell and apologize for soiling their august event. ;) :thumb:

Please be aware that the folks in this or any forum in no way represent what you will find on any given brevet. FWIW I did one ride with the St Louis Randonneurs last year; the RBA was terrific and I had no worries from any of the riders.

On straight vs curved forks:

I struggle to see any difference in how they would perform, given equal head angle and offset values. If you think of the fork as a spring, then it doesn't really matter whether it's curved or not. The whole length of the spring gets involved.

Other factors, like the diameter of the fork's tubing (and how it varies along the length of the fork) would have a far greater impact.

Possibly forks can be made of significantly different materials for straight versus curved. But if not, then it sure seems like a curved fork will absorb more shock. Imagine two forks, made of identical materials. For simplicity, assume a 90 degree head tube angle, so that all of the offset comes from either the bend in the fork in a curved fork, or from the weld angle at the top of the straight fork. Imagine that each fork initially has zero offset so both forks are vertical. All road shock is transmitted directly up each fork. Now attach your super-powerful fork offset bender and pull an offset of six inches. Make the curve on the curved fork tight enough that the tip is nearly horizontal. With the curved fork, all of this offset is created using the thin tubing near the tip. With the straight fork, the entire length of the fork is now angled slightly forward because of the amount of bend at the junction between fork crown and steering tube. Now ride the two forks over a rough road. With the curved fork, the upward forces can easily bend the thin tubing at the tip of the fork, and by construction the force is perpendicular to the tubing so as much as possible will go into flexing the tubing, with only the remainder transmitted to the rider. But with the straight fork, only a small bit of any upward shock will be spent bending the thin tubing at the tip, while most of it will be less-effectively absorbed by bending the thicker tubing along the length of the fork. Seems to me the curved fork would be better at absorbing shock.

I think that Bicycle Quarterly has done some testing comparing road vibration absorption by curved forks made with older, round, superlight tubing versus modern, oval, normal weight tubing and found significant, measurable differences.

Nick

... apologize for soiling their august event. ;) :thumb:

That's silly; Few of the events are held in August. :P

1. Nice bike. Gunnar is a great combination of reasonable price with good design and build quality. The one suggestion I would make is to put some sort of protection over the paint. Even getting a clearcoat shot is a good idea. My Gunnar, and every other one I know is a chip magnet. From what I hear, if you order with waterford paint packages it is less of an issue. Either way, a couple chips won't kill the bike. It will just show that you are putting it to good use.

2. Who is "Richard Cranium"?
A nickname for Richard is "Dick"
A word from Cranium is "Head"

I think you can do the math.

--Colin

To the OP, sorry if I helped derail your thread. You have a nice bike, and I suspect it will work as well as anything else for long distances.

To the OP, sorry if I helped derail your thread. You have a nice bike, and I suspect it will work as well as anything else for long distances.

No problem. I haven't spent a lot of time on this forum and didn't know how polarizing having a straight fork is. Compared to the bikes I have been draping myself over for the last 30 years, this one is an all day cruise bike. Gunnar also seems to be under that impression judging by their write up. Some people seem to think that if Grant Petersen hasn't personally blessed the design or components, then it can't possibly be used for long distance events. I may be getting older but I still like to get down the road on a bike that is fun to ride and doesn't remind me of my Aunt Bessie's Buick.

Among randonneurs, there are probably more followers of Jan Heine and Bike Quarterly than Grant Peterson.