gugie 

Your Fitz is exactly perfect!

83cannondale

Kingston - hope to see you there! By the way, forecast went from 80% chance of rain, mid 40s, to 9% rain, highs in the low 70s. I guess I'll forgo my mudflap project for now. Introduce your self! I'll be riding black 83 cannondale with black fenders, brooks seat.

kingston 

I saw the forecast change. Funny because the original forecast is what motivated me to make the mudflaps in the first place. Looks like it's going to be a beautiful day. I'm considering making a smaller set of "decorative" mudflaps with some of the leftover material. I'll be riding the bike in the picture. See you there.

romperrr 

@catgita, that bike is top notch. What housing are you using? It doesn't bother you under the bar tape?

kingston 

Absolutely stunning. All it needs are some mud flaps . GB makes some nice ones that will match your saddle.

rhm

I wanted to bump this thread anyway, and this post seems the best place to start. I have to admit I wasn't much aware of randonneuring when I first saw this thread, but took an interest in it after that point.

Who else?

noglider 

I heard of it many years ago. A couple of years ago, I attended a meeting of New York Cycle Club, and the evening's event had speakers from one or both of the local randonneuring clubs. It was interesting, and I was especially heartened to hear that the average age of participants is 51 years. I'm interested but haven't dipped my toes in yet. I'm still building miles.

Salamandrine 

I still am pretty fuzzy on the concept of Randonneuring as well. What is the point? Is it a race, a tour, a challenge, a recreational ride? How is it fun? It seems kind of like a century except with added paperwork and bureaucracy -- two things that I try to avoid if possible. When did they start in the US?

I grew up with the (American?) concept of the Century as being the big challenge ride. My first one was sort of a challenge I guess. When I got into the racing crowd a little later, the distance was no big deal. We'd only show up at club centuries in order to eat as much food as possible at the rest stops. That made them worthwhile.

rhm

What's the point? I have no idea. Do sports have a point?

Is it a race? No... uh... what's a race, anyway? There is no winner (but everyone is timed; and there is a first finisher).

Is it a tour? No... uh... what's a tour, anyway? I think touring is about exploring, relaxing, going where the wind blows you. Touring has no rules. Randonneuring has rules.

Is it a challenge? Yes, definitely.

Is it a recreational ride? Yes, definitely; but not just one. It's a habit of recreational rides.

How is it fun? I have no idea... or at least, I can't explain it in a convincing way... but it is. And it's addictive.

I, too, dislike the paperwork &c. The thing is, Randonneuring is a sport, and it has rules. You don't have to like the rules to participate; but they establish a certain baseline or standard that all the participants subscribe to, and this ensures a kind of camaraderie that you don't get in touring. I'm sure there is a similar camaraderie in racing, but I can't elaborate on that.

When did they start in the USA? 1998.

Okay, so much for easy, flippant answers...

Historically, I think Randonneuring is tied to a desire to demonstrate the potential of the bicycle as a reliable and efficient mode of long distance transportation. Early car races had that goal as well. But that's just the origin story, and the sport has left that connection behind long ago. I must admit, though, my own interest in the sport came from that direction as well.

Comparing randonneuring to touring, I would rather go for a tour than a randonnee; but I rarely find the time. Touring and randonneuring both have their challenges, and choosing the latter over the former you simply substitute one set of challenges for the other.

Consider the planning, for example; you can go for a tour anywhere, but you have to figure out the route and logistics and what not, and you're going out and doing it by yourself... and so on. Similarly, you can sign up for a randonnee almost anywhere, and all you have to do is get yourself and your bike to the start and get home again. You're guaranteed a route that someone has tested, you're guaranteed a workable cue sheet, and you're given a clear idea of facilities along the way. If you do the ride, you will ride with people, some of whom you may know from previous rides.

Whatever hardships you encounter on a randonnee, you can be pretty sure the other riders encountered the same thing. Most randonnees have a finish rate of 100% or near that; but occasionally no one finishes. There was a ride in PA in January of 2017, 200k, and a couple riders went out and checked out the whole course, on bikes, a week before the event. Nice weather. On the day of the event, it snowed, and no one finished. So statistically, the two pre-riders finished, and no one else did. The pre-riders, by the way, typically volunteer to help out on the day of the event; in this case, one of the volunteers got in his pickup truck and drove the course, picking up riders as he went.

It's not for everyone.

I'm signed up for a 1200 randonnee that goes counterclockwise around about half of Lake Michigan at the end of August. Over the course of four days I'll ride farther than I did on an eight day tour of upstate NY a few years ago. It will probably be less fun, and not much cheaper, and as for the scenery, well, much of it will be dark. It's hard to explain this in a way that makes sense, but I'm looking forward to it.

Salamandrine 

Good point.

Thank you though. I appreciate the thorough explanation to my somewhat vague inquiry. I guess I was looking for someone to explain why they do these things. Sounds like I'll simply have to try it for myself sometime.

The predetermined and known route aspect is appealing. Hadn't thought of that. Might be nice to ride a couple just to learn some good routes. I didn't grow up in socal, and don't know 'all' the rides like I do in norcal.

gomango

Back to fotos.

Check out this brand new MAP.

Saving my pennies for one of these.

Maybe the prettiest frameset I have ever seen.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mapcyc...390165/in/feed

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mapcyc...n/photostream/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mapcyc...n/photostream/

JaccoW

Not a randonneur myself but I do plan to use my Batavus Randonneur GL for light long distance touring once it is done.



Build log here.

ThermionicScott 

I can't think of a good reason; I just do 'em.

Scottybigs

Keeping this thread alive. I road an almost-century (145 km...really should have done donuts in the parking lot or something) last week, and feel like my Schwinn Voyageur SP is in that near-perfect build phase for getting up to the 200km brevet level.

It's at 26lbs now (without the bag), which is getting into a great weight for a fully equipped bike. I've got a pair of 700c Pacenti Brevets waiting to be laced to 105 hubs, which will drop almost 1 lb off the wheels since the A319's are boat anchors, as are the vintage hubs and freewheel.

I do wish that the frame was made of Reynolds 725 or Kaisei tubing, not because of the weight savings per se, but because of the flex and performance. Tange 2 is great, but my 725 Wabi frame is noticeable stiffer and more responsive.

One thing I've been mulling over is geometry. The Schwinn has 44cm chainstays to account for rear panniers, and 72/72 frame angles. Does anyone ride brevets with mid-range chainstays (42cm) and 73/73 angles? How does it feel?

clasher

Sweet looking ride @Scottybigs maybe I'll see you at a randonneurs ontario ride next season! I've seen a growing number of vintage conversions on brevets the last couple of years... unfortunately for my miyata 1000, I usually ride my carbon road bike for brevets now.

non-fixie 

I haven't ridden any brevets (yet), but I have been mulling over the same question. Mrs non-fixie and I like to take out our bikes and go credit card touring once or twice a year. Typically for a little over a week, with 50-100 km/day, in hilly areas like the Provence or Tuscany with just a saddle bag. Over the years I've acquired and built a few bikes specifically for that purpose.

This is a Gazelle Champion Mondial semi-race. Hand-built by Gazelle's racing department for touring purposes. My assessment so far: very nice bike, but a bit truck-like compared to the racing version. I'm blaming the long wheelbase.



This is a Roy Thame (the former Holdsworth team manager) touring bike, and (probably) built by Tommy Quick. Another very nice bike, but clearly intended to for more luggage than I take along.



This is a frankenbike based on an early eighties Miki-built racing frame that had just enough room for 28mm tires and fenders. It has a shorter wheelbase than the previous two and feels a lot more responsive, while still feeling stable on fast descents.



For the rides we do I like the latter one best. I think the more racy geometry is the main factor.

FWIW.

justinsdrake

What are your thoughts on converting an early 80s MTB to rando with new wheels and those supple rat trap pass tires?

kingston 

While I'm sure you could make it work, 26" wheels would not be my first choice for randonneuring, and 2.3" tires are massive overkill for any brevet I've ever ridden.

unterhausen

I think this thread got me started randonneuring, thanks a lot

You could ride a mtb on brevets. Having said that, I always have trouble with getting numb hands on a bike like that, and I know others say the same. I have a couple of vaguely numb fingers from a 1200k I rode at the end of August, so it can take a while to recover. This is about the longest it has taken.

I caught a number of mtb riders on PBP. None of them seemed to be having much fun, although that could be said for most people that I caught

justinsdrake

I through it was going to be kinda sluggish for such long riding but was going to convert to drop bars. I just really wanted wider tires AND fenders.

I've got a Soma San Marcos with 700c tires that can take about 30 mm with fenders as my other option. I was thinking of using the Compass 32 mm Stampede pass, but those are not tubeless and I dont think will give me the same cushy feeling as the the 35 mm Bon Jon Pass, which are tubeless. Those are likely too big to fit under my fenders without a fender mod like the reach around.

After thinking this through, the San Marcos is probably a better option. Should I use 32 mm tires from compass and keep my fenders or use the 35 mm tubeless and hack up my fenders. Leaning toward the 35 mm as I dont ride in the rain that often so hacking up the fenders dose not seem like it will affect me that many times.

non-fixie 

kingston 

You should use whatever makes you happy. I like having fenders when it rains, think that 32mm is wide enough for 99% of brevet surfaces, and don't see the point of tubeless tires for road bikes.

tyrion

I think this woman has Rat Trap Passes on her rando bike:

rhm

I agree with all of the above, but not quite entirely.

Yes, absolutely, use whatever makes you happy. Rat Trap Pass tires definitely make me happy, but evidently that's not for everyone. Nonetheless, in the last year I've ridden my Rat Trap Pass equipped bike on a complete SR series, two flèches, a 1200 km grand brevet, and assorted other rides.

I like having fenders, too. I like them when it rains, I like them if it might rain, and I like them if it rained recently. I like them the rest of the time, too.

If 32mm is enough for 99% of brevet riding, then perhaps it is not enough for the remaining 1%. That remaining 1% may suck. No big deal. But more to the point, I think, is that as long as most riders are on skinny tires, most brevets will have to be designed to accommodate them. This means busier roads. I did a grand brevet at the end of August that was entirely on roads deemed acceptable to people on skinny tires, which included some roads that were downright dangerous. Some unpaved roads had been considered but rejected on the pre-ride. I cannot second guess that decision, of course. But one way or another, fatter tires open up possibilities that are not available to those on skinny tires.

Perhaps the more important point, regarding fatter tires such as the Rat Trap Pass is that there is no downside. They are just as fast on pavement as skinny tires (and dramatically faster on dirt or gravel). They are no more susceptible to puncture than other tires (and less susceptible to pinch flats). Wheels hold up better, and the rider is more comfortable. I see only advantages.

Okay, to be completely fair, there is the downside that few randonneuring bikes have been designed for fat 26" tires, so you may have to go custom*, and there is the additional downside that a 53 mm tire makes a big splash going through puddles, a splash that inevitably hits your feet. I kinda hate that.

*Old MTB's are a possiblity, but the high bottom bracket and slack geometry are an issue. Also, these frames are built heavy and tough, which is not great for randonneuring. If I were building up a bike for these tires now, I would look at getting an off the shelf frame made for either 650b or 26" wheels with disk brakes (I'm thinking of the Crust Romanceur, I think), and I'd have a custom fork made to fit it with 26" rims and cantilever brakes.

Tubeless tires don't make sense randonneuring. You can't carry a compressor with you, but a tiny little hand pump and a patch kit are no problem.

All that said, @JustinDrake, if you're new to randonneuring I would not worry about the bike yet. Almost any bike will do, and though you can expect it will have shortcomings, its shortcomings may not be what you expected. On a 200 km ride, that's okay. You will quickly start learning its shortcomings, and forming a better idea of what you need to make randonneuring easy and fun. I have found the classic randonneuring bag, the big box in front of the handlebar, to be a great help. It holds everything you need, most of it available even when riding. I've also taken to using a hydration pack slung under the top tube, which holds enough water for many hours of riding and I can drink while riding.

Other aspects of equipment are so oobvious that I think we tend to overlook them. Finding the right saddle is probably more important than finding the right frame. When you have found a saddle and shifters and brakes levers and pedals and shoes that don't cause you any pain after ten or fifteen hours, you'll be well on your way. Until then, I wouldn't worry about the frame and wheels too much, as long as the bike fits you and is in decent condition.

Feldman

An example of a bike that will right controllably and pleasantly with that big front bag--the bag's weight is centered over, maybe even a little behind, the front axle.