Why do you seem to enjoy the suffering you describe?

Indirectly, perhaps. The only real hindrance is that the calipers that come in typical OEM groupset packages have poor clearances*. But that's not hard to circumvent; it's extremely common for rim-brake road bikes to spec brakes that don't match the groupset. And unless we're talking about plus or fat mountain bikes, finding rim brakes that can fit wide tires isn't difficult.

The rim brakes on my gravel bike are a $20 part, weigh about the same as a 105 caliper, enjoy power and modulation which in dry weather is about as good as the hydro discs on my mountain bike, and are currently fitting 53mm tires and full-length fenders with healthy clearance.

*Well, and one other annoyance: sidepull calipers open by a fixed amount when you pop their quick release, rather than fully releasing both arms like when you pop a centerpull or v-brake straddle. Wide-tire setups often have a big difference between brake track width and tire width, so popping the quick release on a sidepull caliper can be badly inadequate for insertion and removal of the tire.
Incidentally, this was the first thing that caught my eye when I looked at the spec of the A Homer Hilsen frame. A rim-brake "gravel bike" designed for 40mm-ish tires and sidepull calipers seems really silly... I guess you could use a centerpull caliper with a backing plate, but I think canti posts would make the most sense for production non-disc.

When I see the argument that GP is responsible for the resurgence of gravel riding, I always wonder which of his designs accommodates wide tires. He was in the position to sell 40mm tires and make a bike that fit them with a decent amount of clearance a long time ago, but I don't see that bike. Now the market has moved to larger tires than that.

Although the people that would buy a bike from him probably don't want discs, I think they do want low trail. And I also don't see any low trail bikes in his current offerings. I would think all of them should be low trail. And take 44mm+ tires, which also seems to be lacking.

While I have no interest in debating the politics of China on a bike forum, it is factually correct to refer to bicycle frames made in Taiwan as "welded Chinese stuff", since the people living and working in Taiwan in fact self-identify as Chinese. I ride a Sam Hillborne, which I could correctly refer to as a Chinese built Rivendell, and everyone who knows anything about bikes would know that I meant the frame came from Taiwan. It would be like saying I have a Korean made Hyundai and someone then calling me uninformed and trying to educate me that North Korea and South Korea are two separate countries. Of course they are. Everyone knows that, and everyone knows that the cars are made in South Korea not North Korea.

Valentine's Day was last week. You've posted in excess of 10 times in this thread. You could send Grant a Valentine and tell him about your crush. He might send one back.

Source? Seems to me, up until quite recently Jan Heine was being ridiculed for the premise that wide tires with lower pressure are more comfortable with nearly the same resistance.

Source?

And... So?

This has what to do with what?

Source?

And... So?

This has what to do with what?

Where would riders come up with this weird idea that they'd want to install wider tires? It's almost as if there were voices... telling them it could be done and that it would be awesome and they'd have fun...

Source?

And... So?

This has what to do with what?

Source?

And.... So?

This has what to do with what?

Do a shopping search for "gravel bike" and tell me out of the first... say... 100 hits- and tell me how many of them have ANY suspension.

I'll help:

https://www.google.com/shopping?hl=en&source=og&tab=wf

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_n...s=gravel+bikes


Source?

Fact: You've taken the phrase "Petersen is far from the only influence behind this, but he has been an unusually forceful spokesperson for a set of values, including the idea that an all-rounder, non-specialist bike for “you and me” can and should be as beautiful and well-made as a race-oriented bike" and turned it into 'Grant invented the gravel bike.'

Source: Your post.

As evidenced in the shopping results- a gravel bike generally does not have either full suspension or even partial suspension. (Source: Shopping results). In the 30 years since college until the advent of the gravel bike as a "thing," what were the popular "all-rounder" bicycle models that were not full (or partial) suspension ATBs, that had clearance for 32-ish tires that weren't low end "comfort" or hybrid bikes? (which often had suspension as well)

The point is that "all rounder" bikes were generally relegated to the low end "sports touring" models- with lower end frames, and lower end components in manufacturers lineups. As the ATB/MTB increased in popularity- the "sport" bike was absorbed into the "MTB" umbrella- (as evidenced by your comment "mtb's were taking off in popularity, and they were commonly used as commuters"), and later split into the "hybrid" category (which were, again generally relegated to lower end models). So for 25 or so years, the industry catered to adults in the hybrid, MTB and road bike categories. Cantilever and V brakes were also available during this time- to allow bikes to have larger tires- if the makers wanted to make a bike to fit tires that wide- but they didn't want to-

Read this for what it says- Grant was a proponent that an all rounder bike need not be a specialized racing machine, nor a bike with suspension for technical MTB trails, it should fit tires that make riding comfortable, be able to fit fenders, have a geometry that allows the bike to be ridden in a comfortable manner- and steel. He also promoted a Craftsman/Arts and Crafts style to include the artwork and lugs- that an all rounder can be beautiful and not confined to pavement and not heavy and sluggish when not on dirt or gravel. That type of bike was not represented.

You may notice you're in the C&V forum. Rivendell is often discussed here because it shares many of the attributes of vintage and classic bicycles. The people who are here are generally predisposed to find these attributes pleasing. In turn, many find the more modern and current style trends less appealing. While Soma and VO as well as Surly and other makers build vaguely similarly aesthetically styled bikes, the bike industry giants- the ones that control the advertising- market modern styled bikes with modern styled components- and the majority of the people buying bikes want something new and modern, not something "classic" which could also very easily be construed as "old fashioned" or "an old bike pulled out of the junkyard." :innocent:

If they did, the bicycle frames would say "made in China" instead of "made in Taiwan."

The people of China and Taiwan both self-identify as Chinese, so things made in either place can be correctly referred to as Chinese made. Doesn't matter what the sticker says.

"While I have no interest in debating the politics of China on a bike forum..."

China is China, Taiwan is Taiwan. Entirely different governments and economic systems. Cut the bull****. You know it, I know it, the American people know it.

Of course everyone knows they are different. That's my whole point.

"it is factually correct to refer to bicycle frames made in Taiwan as "welded Chinese stuff". :rolleyes:

You realize that China and Chinese are two different words with two different meanings, right?

Not to crack any rice bowls....

Mexico is in North America, therefore anything made in Mexico is American. Right?

Disingenuous, not clever.

They invented this cool word to cover the discrepancy- "Taiwanese."

You know it, I know it, the American people know it.


EDIT: And let's go back to that "China" "Chinese" thing...

"Chinese" meaning "of or relating to China, its inhabitants, or one of their languages."

Your reply to "China is China, Taiwan is Taiwan. Entirely different governments and economic systems" was:
"Welded Chinese stuff" would be "stuff" that was either welded in China, or stuff from China that was welded. In either case, from China. Which is not Taiwan. Because Taiwan and China are different. As you know: Therefore it is not factually correct to state that welded stuff from Taiwan could be referred to as "welded Chinese stuff." Because:

I'd like to push back against the insinuation that GP is a 'loser,' which no one said directly, but I think I detected as subtext in one or two posts. Sure, he may go out of business in the near future, but inarguably he's been a success. He created and ran a business that advanced an almost uncompromising vision for twenty five years that had a significant impact on the culture and made numerous lives measurably more joyful. I've never met the man, I've never even seen one of his bikes in person. But my riding and thinking about cycling is informed by everything he's done. It remains to be seen whether Rivendell continues, how it continues, and what kind of financial shape GP ends up in. But putting all of that aside, he's had an incredible run. When you judge the success of a business, you have to ask what the pay off was meant to be.

I don't think the wider-tire thing is driven by the emergence of new tech--i.e. disc brakes. Many 70s Raleighs will fit 38c or 40c tires with fenders. So will many 80s touring bikes. Cantis, V-brakes, centerpulls, and even caliper brakes can accommodate big tires if designed properly.

Does Grant's non-racer schtick play a part in it? Maybe, but I'd guess it's a very small part.

The thing that gave wider tires mass market appeal has to be rising car traffic and deteriorating roads in the US. Vehicle miles traveled - how much people drive in a year - is up more than 50% since 1990. It's up nearly 300% since 1972. Many once-pretty country roads are now scary to ride on. At the same time, governments aren't spending the money to keep their roads in good repair. When I rode across Michigan I discovered that pretty much the length of the entire state had horrible roads--potholes, buckling pavement, dead animals everywhere. I don't have data right now but I'd guess other people's anecdotal experiences will tell the same story.

Add in distracted, texting drivers and you get a combination that turns many people off from riding on the road--especially with skinny tires. People want routes that aren't clogged with traffic, which, more and more, means trails and dirt roads.

P.S. I'd be curious if people from countries with better maintained infrastructure, say Japan or France, have seen a similar trend towards bigger tires take hold (not just 23c to 25c, but actually bigger tires).

It is correct to call things Chinese made if they are made by people who self-identify as Chinese. Period. You are wrong on this point.

If anyone is holding a Legolas frameset with a 58cm tt, let me know.

This is a frameset GP should be pushing, along with a XO1 update.

Why would you "not like to say it"? Seems like a compliment to me. I'll take the "pulled out of the junkyard" look of a C&V MTB over the... how did one poster put it recently... "a dog pooping" look of a modern MTB any day of the week.

I see what you did there, Bob (not sure how many millennials do....).

2 chinas..
 

Chang evacuated the forces to Taiwan when routed in the revolution by Mao , so Taiwan has a ingenious and the decedents of the Chinese revolution's 'runner up'..

ROC has a multi party Parliament , PRC has, just one..

Come on you guys. The Linda Ronstadt thread has caught up to you with 14 pages.
Certainly Mr. Petersen can generate a few more pages!
Brent

"Chinese" meaning "of or relating to China, its inhabitants, or one of their languages."

Your reply to "China is China, Taiwan is Taiwan. Entirely different governments and economic systems" was:
"Welded Chinese stuff" would be "stuff" that was either welded in China, or stuff from China that was welded. In either case, from China. Which is not Taiwan. Because Taiwan and China are different. As you know: Therefore it is not factually correct to state that welded stuff from Taiwan could be referred to as "welded Chinese stuff." Because:

I thank Norm for this every day of the week.

I love this semantic argument about "China"!

Generally speaking, folks refer to something as "American made" if it was made in the United States. Could have been made by a Canadian, an English person, or an American. Identity of the maker is basically irrelevant, country of origin is what people are referring to.

Generally speaking, folks refer to the PRC as "China" and the ROC as "Taiwan".

Effective communication requires using commonly understood definitions of words. If you want to communicate effectively, you'd refer to a ROC-made bike as "Taiwanese" and a PRC-made bike as "Chinese". If you want to be semantically correct, you could make the case that technically, both are "China" and that a ROC-made bike is "Chinese".


But damn, how annoying would that be?

I bought the last one. It is currently being made my Mark Nobliette.

Nobilette Cycles

Hope to have it by late Spring. It is a 59cm w/ a 58 top tube. Have not yet decided on paint. :)