Old 03-28-12, 02:11 PM
  #46  
Keith99
Senior Member
 
Keith99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by aramis
I know I saw these fools with really expensive bikes and 2 water bottles riding the other day.





I didn't realize if you had an expensive/light bike you needed to ride without water and have to have a support car for you if you get a flat.

I hate things strapped to my back, so I don't use a camelback, never seems that hard to grab a water bottle and drink to me.
I totally agree for almost all road rides. When I was inexperienced I like a camelback a lot more. It is nice to top a climb and just have to get teh nipple in yuo mough to drink all the way down while still going balls out downhill.

Gold way way back when drinking on a climb was a challenge. Now I drink enough while climbing and can get a lot cresting the top. I can think of one or 2 rides with limited water sources where that all changes. Then a camelback and over 2 bottles might be the way to go.

Offroad is different. I've gone down some pounding dirt roads where drinking was impossible and where I ended up piccking up 3 bottles in less than a mile (lost by other riders, and thsi was not a well traveled road). And I can think of one very exposed ridge where having a couple of one liter water cubes was a rather good investment.

So for me camelbacks are the right thing for some rides and are junk for others. Same with different bikes for different jobs.
Keith99 is offline