... also, page 4 of the 'intimacy' thread. :bday:

Ah, 'Fred'.
This got me thinking about the origins of 'Fred 2' (your latter definition). Might well have been BSNYC, back in the day.
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...0ea5047a83.jpg

The bike of Fred Birchmore, possibly the original original Fred:https://ids.si.edu/ids/deliveryServi...33733&max=1000

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/histo...world-1462409/

IIRC, there are some good reasons for that attribution. Will always be some question about it, but as good as any. Certainly captures the 'spirit' of Fred. Another, much more recent example, is the late, great Patrick Plaine.
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...3fd05701a4.jpg

I prefer the Flintstone variety. Yaba daba dooooooo!

It appears, by looking at the definition, that ‘intimate’ is most commonly characterized as, “characterized by a close or warm personal relationship”. Sex ranks way down the list. Can’t say that I have a warm or personal relationship, other than a utilitarian, with my bikes. But then I am not a romantic. And to quote Jerry Seinfeld, “ Not that I have a problem with that.”

"Intimate" is an interesting word, and I think the trend is increasingly towards using it as a euphemism for "sexual". Even in its nonsexual sense, I do think it's a very weird word choice as I think "intimacy" really has to be a two-way thing and a utilitarian object can't reciprocate.

There's another sense of the word "intimate" as an adjective as in "He has intimate knowledge of the details", but one wouldn't describe that person as being intimate with the details or the knowledge. There's no sense of a personal relationship in that usage. I don't think there's a sentence where "intimacy" can be used that way.

An accomplished Fred naming a bike after a horse. Perhaps if Birchmore was on BF he would be middle of the road in this discussion.

No, I don't think he'd want to be thought of as getting intimate with a horse.

Commence the Catherine the Great jokes.

Do i dare admit that i have only one bike? I know her quite well, but we have not been intimate.

Certainly true that polygamy is an accepted practice here on teh Biek Formz.

I too have only one bike. Well, technically two, but I claim that since each is permanently resident in one of two locations, I can weasel out of a charge of polygyny.

And I can go further: I can lay my hand on my heart -- or indeed anyone else's heart -- and say that I have not had intimate relations with either bike.

This makes a lot of sense to me, and reflects my experience and perceptions to a large degree. I think that if my situation were different, I would buy a Gunnar Sport and just outfit it in whichever way I needed, because that bike (frame-set) can do it all. Your post is the kind of feedback I needed, and while most reasonable people would either donate or sell a few bikes, I think I will do my best this summer to give them their due attention and miles. Actually, my M80 is a great road bike, touring bike, cargo bike, daily shopper, and, if I rode in the dirt, even a mountain bike, so I could make-do with that.

Yes. It's that "foreign" feeling that I find disconcerting.

Well I have to say, I own 7 bikes and most of my riding is on two of them. That is not to say I don't know the others pretty well, but they don't get a lot of attention and at least two haven't been ridden in over two years.

I guess you could say I am intimate with 2 of my bikes, friends with 3 of them and have drifted apart from the remaining 2.

I've had a Sport since 2006 but it is now my back-up bike. It has rack eyelets, long-ish wheelbase, low BB, and fairly slack geometry. I actually rode it Tuesday. It's more forgiving on the rough surfaces than my Seven.

Haven't ridden it up to the snow in years but I could possibly do that this weekend.
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...f4fd0e535c.png

That's why I nominated this for "ickiest thread title of the year".

The only other logical conclusion involves a hypothetical scenario in which someone forgot to replace the saddle on the seat post before embarking for a ride.

But why the "getting to know you ..." part? Every time I read that, I have to reach for the eye-wash.

Well you sure have taken "icky" to a whole new level here, haven't you?

You are getting to know me. ;-)

Just to be clear:

;-) == "winkie of absolution"

;) == "creepy winkie"

I try to keep the numbers down, though I do a lot of different riding, so I still have 4 bikes: Fat, FS MTB, Gravel/Road, and utility/errand.

If I lived somewhere with a much shorter winter, I’d probably lose the Fat bike.

I’m the same way with music. I have one electric guitar, one steel string acoustic, one classical. One electric bass, one standup.

I know some musicians who will have multiple electrics or acoustics, but I’d rather just work with one.

Maybe if I was a pro, I’d have backup instruments or bikes.

Sorry, but I really don't want to know you THAT well.

Agreed but I have different bikes for different purposes. For example my fast road bike is twitchy and harsh and I honestly don't like riding clipless all that much but I can't keep up with the fast groups without it. Group rides only.
My original gravel hybrid is my winter beater for roads and 12 month light trail use but I ride it in the city or as commuter or running errands.
My single speed gravel bike is for rainy days so I don't have to maintain the drivetrain or clean it. I also use it for commuting and errand running 12 mo a year.
My fat bike is great in the snow but doubles as my mountain bike as well and I use it 12 mo a year. My original mountain bike I traded it for my nice fat bike. I like the big tires and no suspension better, no maintenance, more grip, better climbing. Plus I don't like technical trails or drops.
My Italy bike stays there. I ride it a month or so per year when I'm out there so I got a cheaper one on purpose.

All have been upgraded w/ better components as things worse out or in some cases I just wanted something better like GPS mounts, water bottles, flat/spare equipment, going tubless, some have carbon wheels or better groupset. Over time this is the joy of owning them as you slowly build them into what you prefer.

Yes, I have tried to assign "slots" for each bike. The Technium is the lightest and largest, so handles the long-distance duties. The Moser is its backup. The Grubb is for 40 miles and shorter, as is the Manufrance. The Barnard I have just built, so I'm not sure what distances it will occupy, but I have a fixed gear wheelset for it, too. The M80 is my winter utility ride and my summer tourer. The Rudge is basically summer utility with some short jaunts thrown in. I think part of my problem is that where I live, I only have a 90-day window, June 15 to Sept 15 to ride. Maybe I can expand that a bit.

That's an interesting cell phone holder he used.