Comparing a carbon fiber bike to a ferrari is a ridiculous analogy. Grant's bikes cost thousands while a lighter carbon fiber bike with a spiffy modern 10 sp drive train can be purchased for less than $1000. Like it or not the carbon fiber city bike is here to stay. Trek's 7.7FX is now carbon and its really just a matter of time before lower end bikes, such as, the 7.5FX or Specialized Sirrus are carbon.

I read the book, and found it to be very entertaining. Grant has some very definite opinions on the cycling industry, and the disservice it may be doing to cyclists. For the most part, I agree.

His wisdom certainly does not apply to everybody, but it does apply to a large number of people out there. As serious hobbyists, most people on the forums would probably be offended by his book, as we tend to enjoy over-thinking our cycling, and purchasing possibly unneeded accessories.

Here's the transcript of an interview Grant did with NPR on "bike to work day" earlier this year:

To me one of the more notable things he said was this:


That's certainly one way to ride, but it's not how I typically do it. I intentionally place demands on my body. For me that is the point. Aside from just getting to work, I want it to be vigorous exercise.

However, I was intrigued enough by his comment to do a little test. I compared my usual commuting style (cycling shorts, road bike, fast pace) to the style he's promoting (work clothes, commuterish bike, easy pace). Look for a new thread on the results in the near future.

My intent is not to promote either style. All I really found is that there are pros and cons to each. Which you choose depends on what's more important to you. For my 6 mile commute, either one is legit.

I will admit upfront that I believe Grant is far more controversial than he really needs to be. He could get his point across without being so anti-racing. If you were to ask me, it's really the active recreational cyclists in this town that we have to thank for the infrastructure we have.

Bwahahahahahha!

http://www.citybikes.coop/used-bikes/

No... it's not a ridiculous analogy at all. AND you should read my post. Did I say anything about carbon fibre? No, I didn't. Wow... surprise! I wasn't even thinking about carbon fibre.

You seem to be getting bent of shape about Grant Petersen's approach based on a few of your responses. Hey... lighten up - nobody's forcing you to read and follow the book!

... back to biking...

Truth.

However, it's very likely Grant wouldn't sell nearly as many books if he said something profoundly reasonable such as:

"Commuting by bicycle can be accomplished in any number of different ways depending on many variables including, but not limited to, distance, time, terrain, climate, weather, rider, and goals. If an individual has a reasonably short 5 mile commute across flat paved terrain, and they're not too concerned with speed or using the commute as exercise time, then it's likely that individual will be perfectly happy commuting on any old bicycle they can find and wear regular clothing, provided the weather complies. However, as distances get longer and/or terrain gets more varied and or as goals of the commute become more fitness-oriented, many riders will find that they're better served by bicycles specifically designed for high speeds on the given terrain of their commute route, along with performance clothing that is more comfortable than natural fibers when soaked in the sweat produced by high levels of physical exertion. Additionally, those who intend to commute by bike in climates where the weather typically produces harsh environments will find that they are better served by equipment and clothing that will help them stay safe and comfortable in those harsh elements, such as studded tires for dealing with ice and breathable rain gear. Bike commuting is a highly individualistic activity and each given rider has to find what does and does not work for them. Some degree of trial and error will accompany any beginner commuter cyclist as they learn the ropes of the single greatest way to get from point A to point B that's ever been invented!"





It's much more fun to demonize entire segments of the cycling community for no good reason.

PETERSEN: Yeah. Well, racing is presented to us as the goal that we should all aspire to, and I totally don't believe that. Racing is fringe. Racing ruins bicycle riding for a lot of people. They think that, well, I've been riding a bike for a few years. It's time for me to get a racing bike, get the clothes, get the click-in shoes and start not having fun on a bike. And it ends up being a big trap. And I was trapped in that for 20, 22 years, probably.

Got to ask, who is presenting to us that racing is the goal we should all aspire to? Why and how was he trapped? Is there someone out there controlling our thoughts and actions? Weird, IMHO.

Get on the Google Groups RBW email list. Used Rivendells come up at least once a week.

"PETERSEN: Wear the clothes that you're going to wear at work. Don't dress up like an American bike geek just to ride a bicycle to work. If your commute is reasonable, say 10 miles or under, dress the way you're going to dress for the weather or the day."

The shirt I wore for my morning 9 mile ride is just about dry now, hanging up on a hanger in my office. If my commute were flat I could probably ride slowly enough to not soak my shirt, but it is not flat. Three miles or so of climbing in first gear warms me up. I do sweat pretty easily, though. I'm just glad I don't stink.

he was on tv here yesterday
http://www.wgntv.com/news/middaynews...,6223681.story

Petersen is pretty dogmatic in some of his assertions, but the "who" is the whole media/industry/culture. I remember going to my LBS and watching many regulars come in with spandex, lycra, clips, racing helmets, racing inspired bike frames, bright almost garish colour combinations, and so on. The tendency to think that - hmmm - if I want to bike, I need to look or emulate that "look" is pretty prevalent. Once you aspire to be just a "bit better", then you want to get the gear/clothing/things that are associated with high level performance. To some degree, this is true - you can't perform well using junk; but this presumes we all want to be at this really high level.

Of course, you can find this trend-to-excess in any sport of discipline. I practice martial arts and am a photographer as well, and you'd think to be "serious" about it, you need to have silk robes, a rack of swords and spears, or photography vests with a billion pockets and every camera/lens accessory in existence. Hey - there's a magazine for everything! The irony is that the experts often seem to do a whole lot more with a whole lot less.

If you're serious about racing and passionate about "speed", then the whole racing mantra makes sense. But for me, that wasn't my first interest - I just wanted to ride more for the sake of it - and I would think that for many of us mere mortals, a lot of what Petersen espouse works just fine.

I am always kind of surprised at the amount of dissension GP's opinions bring. He seems to promote more of a "whimsical air" of what he thinks cycling should be but so what?

Ride and wear what makes you comfortable and happy. It's all about having fun to me. :)

I disagree. When I go into a bike store, they typically have a wide variety of bikes, and the first question from the salesperson is "what are you looking for?" If I say I'm looking for an MTB, they aren't going to push a road bike on me, because it will be faster on the road, but break on the trail. If I say I need a bike for group road rides or racing, they'll direct me to the road bikes. Never experienced LBS, societal, media or industry pressure to buy a road bike over any other type of bike.

Actually, I agree with you. I'm thinking more of the person who really doesn't know what they want, and is inadvertently just depending on what they see in popular culture to define their needs and parameters. As an example, I was in my LBS a month ago waiting for my bike service to finish, and a middle-aged, somewhat out of shape man wandered in, hadn't been on a bike in 20+ years, and started asking around for bikes. The LBS staff is pretty good and tried to nail down what he wanted, but the customer ended up trying out a bike at least $500 more than what he needed, along with some pretty impressive accessories, etc. I suspect that the customer thought - like many of us do sometimes - that "more" is better.

Petersen is probably unfairly demonizing "racing" in biking, when it's not really racing per se, but rather the high end professional world of performance gear that meets the needs of pros or semi-pros and even high end amateurs, but is really overkill for amateurs that me just do daily commuting or weekend rides for the sake of it.

Like I said... you'll find this in any discipline. My wife enjoys scrap booking. Wow. Have you ever seen the number of gadgets and accessories for what started as a hobby of making artistic items out of essentially waste materials?

... not that I've ever bought more than I needed... and then tried to explain it to my wife... ahem... :rolleyes:

Frankly I think it's normal and good for people to just speak the truth.

A racing bike and racing clothing is not at all a logical choice for any use other than training and racing.

I don't know why that's controversial or confusing for people, nor do I understand why people take it so personally. I commute on a racing bike regularly, because I often roll my training ride into my ride home. Obviously it's not impossible, and no one is saying that it is. The disadvantages are, however, obvious to anyone who has ever tried it. I hope so, anways - it certainly should be.

I've also commuted on racing motorcycles. I was willing to accept the disadvantages because I put more value on other things. I was also a stupid kid, but more to the point, the fact I was able to do it doesn't make it the right tool for the job.

That's what people say about bicycles in general.

Those people are wrong, and generally stupid.

I think Grant has confused the popularity of riding bikes for exercise and sport with the industry "pushing" racing as the goal of all cycling. Riding bikes fast is fun and its really popular. The bike you buy and the clothes you wear for that looks "racy" I guess, but it really isnt about racing to most participants. The industry will focus on what is popular.

I appreciate him being there telling people there are other ways to enjoy a bike, but he doesn't have to be down on people who also enjoy going fast.
I wear spandex for commuting, but I also wear regular clothes when take the bike to the restaurant, on a pub crawl, or to the grocery store. I think most people are smart enough to figure out that there's a lot of ways to ride a bike. I think his intended audience is mostly people with no association with cycling whatsoever - he wants to break down any stereotypes they might have that would turn them off cycling.

I would love to have some of the bags they sell, but I cant afford them :(

I think that's everybody's response in this thread to feeling lectured on what is appropriate equipment.

/sigh

Uhhh... I'm being daft. Not sure what you mean. Mind you, this thread is probably going in circles now...

I rode with SPDs for a couple of years in the middle of my 20 years of commuting, but during the second winter I took them off so I could ride in winter boots, and when spring came, I realized I didn't miss them. If you're stopped anyway, the 1-2 seconds it takes to rotate the pedal to a starting position is usually no time lost. Even if it is, it is dwarfed by the time it takes to change shoes at both ends of the commute.

What are we considering a racing bike though? I have a skinny tire road bike with drops and brifters, but it's pretty much bottom of the barrel as far as racing bikes go. It's got mounts for a rack for cripes sakes. ;) I've raced on it but no pro nor serious amateur would even consider it.

I think pallen has it right. Somewhere else Grant is credited saying that a commuting bike should be like a pickup truck on two wheels. Well, lots of people (myself included) would rather commute in a fun little 2 seat roadster. It doesn't just have to be about racing. Cars have to deal with speed limits. With a bike the limiting factors are you, your bike and safety. If you like going fast, why not a road bike?

So for me, my road bike IS the right tool for the job and a logical choice. Can it carry a load like a Surly LHT (a bike that Grant likes) ? No. But I don't need that capability on my commute. Just like I don't need a pickup. Might it come in handy some time? Sure, but the trade off is worth it to me and I'm not a stupid kid.

I wouldn't say that I take Grant's musings personally. I certainly don't lose sleep over what he thinks. On the other hand, he's basically telling a bunch of people, many of whom I assume have been commuting for quite awhile, - that they're doing it all wrong. Of course that's going to bother people.

I can't recall that anywhere in his book. Maybe he said it somewhere else, but I really don't think that was his point (pick up truck analogy).

I'm going out on a limb here, but I think Petersen's point is.... just ride (like the title). Ride in whatever makes you happy. If you have a beater, and it does the job, great. If you have a fancy expensive road bike and you love riding on it, great. Just don't think that to ride your bike, you need to invest or have the latest, greatest, frictionless, slipstream inducing gear.

I think that's his point - just ride - it's not that complicated. Use the right tools if you need them. He even mentions in his book that if you plan on doing a super long journey, you might want those fancy bike shorts, etc. But there is a tendency to think that for any kind of sport, you must look, dress, and act like the pinnacle athletes to even participate. For those of use who didn't even know what "LBS" stood for until a few months ago, will clips, superfit clothes, and the latest components really - really - make that much of a difference? Nope. Just a decent pair of shoes, some clothes that you feel comfortable in, and a well tuned bike, and you're ready to hit the road! So, for the common cyclist, don't delude yourself into thinking that newer is always better, that faster is always more satisfying, and that lycra makes you more attractive! :thumb: (Well, I was hoping on that last point, but the wife disagrees!)

Disclosure: I have never met or spoken to Grant Petersen, and I have no idea where Walnut Creak, CA is.;)