Originally Posted by
a1rabbit
I guess I just assumed touring was an overnight event to a location that won't allow you to get home before nightfall.
Not necessarily ... in the randonneuring world, most of the events are to locations that won't allow you to get home before nightfall. Same with the 24-hour time trials. I've also done a number of non-event rides that took me past nightfall, but wouldn't have necessarily called them tours.
Originally Posted by
a1rabbit
Like you said, I'm a noob, and I admit it. When I used to tour, I called touring "bicycle camping" because I had no idea there was a term for it. This was years ago when I was a teen.
Bicycle camping is one type of bicycle touring. However, you don't need to camp on a tour if you don't want to. You can stay in hostels, hotels, cabins, or wherever.
Originally Posted by
a1rabbit
But you see, if you don't ask "does it fit within prescribed touring definitions?", you seem to know or have some idea what the definition is, and probably quite a solid understanding at that. I don't, I'm learning and that's why I'm here. To get answers to questions, to meet people, to help others in whatever way I can with my limited knowledge. Now, I did wiki "bicycle touring" before posting this thread. I read their information. But I wanted to know what others here considered a "tour". That's all.
Back in the old days of touring (based on books I've found in libraries published in the 1970s and even into the 1980s), cycletouring seemed to have much more of a definition than it does now. In those days, it seems that a cycletour was generally at least 5 days long, and preferably longer. In order for it to be a "real" tour, cycletourists would load up their bicycles to some astronomical weight, carrying with them everything they thought they might possibly need on the tour. Cycletourist had front panniers so that they could carry a large bag of rice in one and a large bag of oats in the other, with a few dehydrated meals tucked in around. And they would be entirely, or almost entirely self-sufficient during the tour ... even if the tour was through a fairly heavily populated area. At no point would a cycletourist do something like hopping on a train mid-tour to take them to a different part of the country to continue the tour ... using any other method of transportation than the bicycle was frowned upon.
I guess the idea was to get away from civilisation and to challenge yourself to survive for a length of time with what you had with you.
But times have changed and the concept of cycletouring has loosened up a lot. Now there's no particular time or distance that makes a ride a tour ... you can do a "daytour" to a park, cheese factory, or the bakery in the next town, or you can spend 2 years cycling around the world ... or anything in between. Now a cycletourist can ride a racing bicycle with a teensy saddle bag containing a tube, tire lever, and a granola bar, and can stop at restaurants and hotels along the way (credit card touring). Now you can ride for three days, then board a train, bus or ferry to get to the next place you want to ride, and ride some more. Or you can drive to a particular location, set up your headquarters there, and cycle out in several different directions over the next few days (hub-and-spoke tour). You can carry the bags of rice and oats, but it can be nicer to stop in at shops along the way to buy your food, if shops are available.
Originally Posted by
a1rabbit
That makes good sense, I guess I just think the definition is too wide or something. I don't need precise details of what touring is. It just seems strange to consider a ride to a park I never visit in my town, a tour. But when you really think about it, that's exactly what it is for the simple fact that I've never visited it.
Exactly ... and it's a great place to start if you've never toured before. It can also be something interesting to do if you don't have a lot of time to spend touring.
And if it takes a day (or an afternoon or whatever), it's generally referred to as a "daytour".