Originally Posted by
Glenn1234
Okay, so I'm sure I understand:
1) Nutritional planning is not necessarily an issue of what I eat before the ride (like last night), but what I eat during the ride?
2) The seat thing will probably require some breaking in or some experimentation. I do better with a smaller seat, but with the seat post problems in a recent other post, this one seems to be the most stable, and I went on a similar ride with it last year (26 miles, laps on a small bike trail) with no problems, so my guess is probably just duration of pedaling.
3) Route issues is probably still the biggest thing I'm not seeing a precise solution for. Maybe a post in A&S might be warranted about kinds of roads traveled on, but like I hinted at, I can look at maps and struggle most if not all the time to find things that aren't highway speeds with no shoulders (or things that require mountain/BMX biking to traverse). For example, I had a goal last year of biking to a certain park for the day (bike around, hit the trails, enjoy nature, that kind of stuff), but the options were either a 4-lane 65mph highway with no shoulders, or a 2-lane 65 mph road with no shoulders. Not good.
As far as what Google took pictures of rolling around in their truck (street view is more handy for that), it seems that they haven't covered about 90% of my normal routes.
I'm curious, what is it about climbs that scare you? I've always liked the idea of working to conquer anything that's put in front of me, and yes there were some nice climbs and some nice descents (one about 40mph I'd guess). With the highway thing, that's something I really don't have control of. As you say, "All it takes is one kid texting at 60 mph to end everything." But you got to take certain risks - about everything here is highway speed outside of city streets. The only difference is the number of cars.
There are a few issues, and the hardest one is to stop thinking like a driver, but start thinking like a cyclist. Drivers tend to prefer high speed arterials, as they make the trip shortest time wise. Cyclists tend to prefer quiet streets with little traffic. Older cities that were designed on a grid pattern work best, because you tend to have quiet streets on either side of the arterial, so you could avoid the arterial except for obstructions like railway tracks and highways, that blocked the smaller streets off. Unfortunately the most common design since about 1950 has been the cul-de-sacs off crescents off arterials design, which not only makes it impossible to stay off arterial roads to get anywhere, but also maximizes the amount of asphalt per hectare of land as well, and has virtually eliminated the square building lot. Some other common features in such areas is that sidewalks usually do not exist, 1960's thinking that nobody wanted to walk anymore if they could drive instead, transit is limited to the arterials, which could be quite far away on foot, and bicycle lanes are about as common on the arterials as sidewalks are on the crescents and cul-de-sacs off them.
As the popularity of the automobile wanes over the next 40 years or so, they will see how stupid this design really was, but it will probably take close to 100 years to get rid of it.
Not much you can do if you live in one of these areas except move to an area with a grid design.