[Closed] Gravel Biking in the UK: Just like 'Mountain Biking' was 25-30 years ago...

Absolutely - pretty much what I said here

http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/anyone-ditched-the-road-bike-for-a-cyclo-cross/page/2#post-7540894

Yep. I've been saying the same for a while now.

Get on bike. Go out. Ride. Explore.

[img] [/img]

Yep. Riding all my routes in the Chilterns at the moment, that used to ride on an MtB. All good!

The people in the marketing department are probably quite young, so they think everything they come up with is actually new.

Interesting thread that other one, given that I'm ditching an Equilibrium in favour of a Fortitude Adventure with a drop-bar conversion and 40-45mm tyres. Absolutely loving it, and means that 'N' now equals four (so long as I don't need a folding bike).

I see what you're saying, but the flies in the ointment are choice of frame material we not have carbon and titanium at reasonable prices along with steel and ally, and there's the brakes, more specifically disc brakes, which work far better than any U/Canti/V brake does, so it's a bit different in that respect.

Nah, not really. Back then you had oldies getting out into the countryside, but you still had fast racer types and youngsters looking for speed and thrills.

MTBers are the same as they always were, it's just the bikes that are much better, in many cases enabling the MTBers to be much better too!

I'd agree with the OP's comments, I'd agree with other comments with the same thoughts.

It's why I ride a CXer (and a roadie)

I like being old school.

Exactly what molgrips said.

I know what you all mean. Cx bike felt a lot like my early mtbs.

It's not for me at the moment, but if it lets people recapture their youth without having to resort to vintage MTBs then that's got to be a good thing.

🙂

I

Mountain bikes were just a passing fad

[img] [/img]

Looks like wide bars have yet to re-peak.

Sort of. Although I think that the early days of MTB did envolve some rough terrain, places like the lakes. i don't think people are tackling the big classic lakes routes on cross bikes

But on the other hand its back to bikes being versatile. my Kona kileau I toured on, road to work on it, road on the road and even time trialed it. Lots of modern bikes are very specific in their role

probably the strongest argument is for it being like pre MTB. When people just road the bike they had on and off road. The bikes had reasonable size tyres and just got in with it

probably the strongest argument is for it being like pre MTB. When people just road the bike they had on and off road. The bikes had reasonable size tyres and just got in with it

This as well

Marketing bullshit to fuel the n+1 equation.

PS I have 5 bikes. 😳

Sort of. Although I think that the early days of MTB did envolve some rough terrain, places like the lakes. i don't think people are tackling the big classic lakes routes on cross bikes

Agreed. I started riding in '91 on a Kona Cinder Cone in the Peaks: Edale, Mam Tor etc I wouldn't want to do that on my CdF now!!!!

In 1985 I had no intention of riding my mtb anywhere near a road, lane or even fire road. That was, and still is, the appeal. However, I love my Gnar cross with 40c and it serves it's purpose beautifully.

if it lets people recapture their youth without having to resort to vintage MTBs then that's got to be a good thing.

I dont see the need to spend £800 on a CX bike when you can get a decent early 90s mountain bike for £70.

Nah. In the early 90's I was riding the same stuff on my Orange Clockwork as I do on the modern bike, albeit slower. I wouldn't want to ride those trails on a gravel bike.

hm, kind of see what you're getting at, but - my first MTB was in ? 1986 and another in 1988.
While the first one was not much more than scratching at the surface, the second - rigid Stumpjumper - was taken up hill and down dale in a way that I don't think even a very capable gravel bike would enjoy.

To the extent of full Munro expeditions, lots of Pentlands routes, Cairngorms -- though I suppose skinny ish tyres, solid geometry haven't changed when cf. gravel bikes...

I was talking to the old lady (she's in her 80's) down the road the other day, she and her husband were both keen cyclists. She said he used to do 12 to 14 thousand miles a year and she would do 10 to 12 thousand, all on one bike each (but with another set of wheels for racing).
Some of that mileage would be off road too.

It's just a hipster fad. CX used to be what roadies did in the winter to keep fit and it just wasn't fun. Narrow tyres, lots of mud, no suspension. All sounds amazing.

Tell you what, ignore this internet thing too and go back to writing letters.

CaptainFlashheart - Member
Yep. I've been saying the same for a while now.
Get on bike. Go out. Ride. Explore.

Pretty sure that was Freddie Mercury not you CFH - unless you're not telling us something.

Gravel biking is [s]more[/s] exactly like Rough Stuff circa 1950s.

Gravel biking is [s]more[/s] exactly like [s]Rough Stuff[/s] cycling circa [s]1950s[/s] 1890s.

25 (oh OK, more like 20) I had a mtb that was about as capable as a quality modern cx bike. But I'd have killed for a better bike. We weren't defined or facilitated or aided by the shitness of the bikes, we were just held back and occasionally maimed, I can't see anything in that to feel reminiscent about personally. Those rough stuff boys wouldn't have used those bikes if they'd had a choice either.

Having said all that, there's something about fatbiking in the hills that does make me reminiscent in the same way you describe, so maybe I'm just a gigantic hypocrite. I'm nearly saying "But it's not the same", and I don't think it actually is but still "It's not the same" is what hypocrites say so... 🙂

Rose tinted specs anyone?

Agreed. I started riding in '91 on a Kona Cinder Cone in the Peaks: Edale, Mam Tor etc I wouldn't want to do that on my CdF now!!!!

Is your CdF less capable off-road than your '91 Cinder Cone?

I had a go on a CX bike Saturday. Tried it down some rutted, holed, rooty, muddy chute.
It was shit.

Got back on my fatbike. Brilliant.

It's good that there is now a niche sub-genre for riding fireroads... 😉

Cx bike felt a lot like my early mtbs.

My current MTB feels a lot like my early MTBs (albeit with better brakes).

I did the whole riding slightly wider tired road type bikes off road years ago culminating in riding fixed/brakeless off road for 2 or 3 years.
You don't need an MTB to ride off road but ultimately they are more fun (to me) which I why after years I switched back to one. The fixed bike was fastest on easy terrain (gained quite a few KOMs) but I was avoiding the more challenging terrain (which again is generally the better fun terrain) so was missing the point.

I didn't have an MTB 25 years ago. My 'gravel' bike is great for flying along fire roads, is that what MTB was like BITD? Wouldn't dream of taking it round half the more fun routes here.

I built my Salsa El Mariachi to be like a 90s rigid MTB. I missed doing long rides in the Valleys from my house, with 50/50 road/off-road. It's fantastic - far better than my 90s bikes ever were. It's a modern day hybrid.

My 'gravel' bike is great for flying along fire roads, is that what MTB was like BITD?

No, at least not for me. The old outdoorsy types were hacking across the mountains, with plenty of carrying; the youngesters like me were still racing each other down the local bridleways and crashing - jsut slower, and without the hand-dug trails and jumps.

Just like 'Mountain Biking' was 25-30 years ago...

Yeah i guess so, but people were riding trails before mountain bikes came along.

[img] [/img]

There is nothing new going on here, people have been riding touring bikes on unsurfaced roads for years.

And even race bikes it would seem.

[img] [/img]

Some folk on various cycling forums seem to really have a bee in the bonnet over the whole gravel bike thing, i don't really understand why.

I started riding in '91 on a Kona Cinder Cone in the Peaks: Edale, Mam Tor etc I wouldn't want to do that on my CdF now!!!!

CdF isn't a gravel bike though, more of a commuter / tourer.

The main problem with riding gravel bikes on technical offroad boils down to the bars IMO. Flat bars just make far more sense for techy riding, otherwise I think there is little difference between early mtbing and modern gravel bikes, except the new bikes are better.

I love that Slate

I've used my "Gravel" bike on old-school mtb routes in Wales and so on. It's amazing what you can ride with care and it does take me back to my early mtb years - but the main advantage of this kind of bike, as far as I'm concerned, is that with some slick tyres on, it's fast enough to do proper road rides on, without feeling held back - so it saves me needing to buy a pure road bike too.

I think there is little difference between early mtbing and modern gravel bikes, except the new bikes are better.

Except for the tyres. They are the biggest difference. Even a 1.9" tyre back in the day gives way more protection and rideability than a 32c.

Except for the tyres. They are the biggest difference. Even a 1.9" tyre back in the day gives way more protection and rideability than a 32c.

Hence my 'gravel' bike is actually a drop-bar converted rigid 29er which will take up to 2.4" tyres.

Ah so not really a gravel bike then!

I don't like the idea of huge tyres. The appeal of the bike to me, is that it rolls really fast and feels like a road bike. If I lost that, I may as well ride an mtb instead.

Isn't gravel biking for people who have finally realised that the area they live in is actually pish for mountain biking?.

Isn't gravel biking for people who have finally realised that the area they live in is actually pish for mountain biking?.

LOL! That was pretty much the main reason I bought one!

For people that think gravel biking is just like 90s mountain biking, and that's a great thing, why not pull a rockhopper out of a skips instead? 90s mtbs are also like 90s mtbs.

That's only half sarcastic btw

40C WTB Nanos are surprisingly large, probably akin to a 90s "1.75in" tyre.

32c is a cyclocross size, gravel bike are more like ~40c, couple that with 700c wheels and you have pretty offroad capable tyre/wheel combo.

[i]Isn't gravel biking for people who have finally realised that the area they live in is actually pish for mountain biking?.
[/i]

Or in my case, only a few good trails and lots of mediocre ones, i take the MTB out to play on the good trails and use the Vaya on the smoother less exciting ones instead of road riding.

I got a CX bike a couple of years ago. But to be honest its just morphed into a road bike with disc brakes (and bad angles).

For me drop bars are sooooo much worse than flat bars (for pretty much everything other than aero positions) to the point that its completely pointless using a drop bar bike for anything other than out and out road.

Im quite happy with skinny tires, rigid forks, narrow bars etc but putting drop bars on the bike just ruins it for me offroad.

Gravel Biking in the UK: Just like 'Mountain Biking' was 25-30 years ago...

it's complicated, it's different, but yes, i know what you mean...

For people that think gravel biking is just like 90s mountain biking, and that's a great thing, why not pull a rockhopper out of a skips instead? 90s mtbs are also like 90s mtbs.

It [b]IS[/b] pretty similar to how [b]I[/b] got into 'mountain biking' though, that's the point for me. I've gone full circle, through suspension and gnarrr and all the rest to come back to just enjoying having a bike i can ride up gravel paths and farm tracks and bridleways, but also do a better job of linking it together.

I wouldn't dream of taking it to an uplift day, I've got a much better tool for that. But for those days when you don't really have a route in mind, no clock pressure, and fancy a bit of 'I wonder where that goes?' riding, I'd rather have my CX than my first MTB.

I don't like the idea of huge tyres. The appeal of the bike to me, is that it rolls really fast and feels like a road bike. If I lost that, I may as well ride an mtb instead.

I wouldn't dream of taking it to an uplift day, I've got a much better tool for that. But for those days when you don't really have a route in mind, no clock pressure, and fancy a bit of 'I wonder where that goes?' riding, I'd rather have my CX than my first MTB.

yeah, that.

For people that think gravel biking is just like 90s mountain biking, and that's a great thing, why not pull a rockhopper out of a skips instead? 90s mtbs are also like 90s mtbs.

Oh, might just do that; keep my Kilauea company 🙂
Mate along the road *does* have a Rockhopper (steel) and no way will he be parting with it unless over his dead body...

I wouldn't dream of taking it to an uplift day, I've got a much better tool for that. But for those days when you don't really have a route in mind, no clock pressure, and fancy a bit of 'I wonder where that goes?' riding, I'd rather have my CX than my first MTB.

I'd have my rigid 29er for that. Just took it out on some rooty, very rocky and very steep trails that I'd never consider a 'gravel' bike on. And it's comfortable for riding miles on road too.

I'd also have a gravel bike to go alongside it - but not replace it.

Hi Matt, or you ride weird, inappropriate bikes and have a laugh......

DoctorRad - Member
...before suspension got involved, but with slightly narrower tyres and drop bars?
Discuss.

Precisely how I have described it to several people lately ...

dufusdip - Member
It's just a hipster fad. CX used to be what roadies did in the winter to keep fit and it just wasn't fun. Narrow tyres, lots of mud, no suspension. All sounds amazing.
Tell you what, ignore this internet thing too and go back to writing letters.

As wonderful as technology is, there is something to be said for (relative) simplicity, most "progress" comes with some unforeseen side effects mostly whinging about cost it seems...

Sometimes it is nice to just dial down the complexity...

Hmmmmm, maybe there's a way we can trick the marketing people into pursuading the manufacturers that 26" is the next big thing on the roads?

i think we need to clarify the differences between stereo type 1980s and stereo type 1990 MTBs

The 1990 was influnced by SC racing. there was trend for less weight, steeper head angles, thinner tyres and crucially a more flat riding position and narrower bars. The first time I road this type down a hill i was terrified.

The 1980s was much more upright, wider bars, shorter stem and often bigger tyres. I think these bikes have often been forgotten along with desire to ride steep rough terrain that went with them

[img] [/img]

I did the Wiggle South Downs thing on Saturday (well sort of - I followed the route ish, glad I didn't pay £35 for the privilege) on a fs 29'er. Would have been a lot more fun on my Fargo I think........

Good point on 90's mtbs, they are what I grew up on, and for covering ground in an XC race are amazingly quick, and were okay on the road with a few minor mods.

Here is a nice random example from the web (not too dissimilar from the bike I had). Just look at that saddle to bar drop 😀

[img] [/img]

Geometries, whats the real difference between say My TCX Adv CX'er and a say a 29'er XC race machine or mid 90's XC machine? I'd say not a fat lot, they all look to be steep head angles, BB heights give or take 20mm can't be far out, top tube length similar perhaps, stems all within 30mm (say for a 100mm std length) Ok so the drops on a CX'er sent you further forward on the hoods, but bar ends kinda do that on an XC bike.
Tyres, well we're all going bigger now unless you race CX, so the Gravel Grinders I use are 38mm's on 700c wheels which mean we're not far away from XC 29er territory...
Position, I think this is the only real difference.. CX'er and Gravel bikes are way more arse up/head down and I think they need to be, but it's been proven time again that a good XC bike will rattle around a CX course as quick in the right hands.
The only major difference I see is a slightly more upright position on a specific Gravel Bike yet an XC bike with a -degree stem on it would almost replicate that position.

All much of a muchness, more to do with what the rider wants out of a bike these days rather than being dictated to by manufacturers, they're just filling in a gap..

Not a huge difference all told.

Unless I'm blind.

Seems to me that the wheel size and related bar width are the biggest differences.

I'm with cookea, and bikebouy's last bit, for me having gone through the MTB revolution from the late 80's it's all about simplicity and grabbing something to ride, following your nose linking up bridleways with canal tow paths and country lanes, I still drive round now seeing a bridleway sign and thinking "I wonder if that links up" checking Google Earth and then riding it.

I'm enjoying riding from home, the uncomplicated nature of grabbing a bike and not involving an hours drive, the uncomplicated cantilever brakes, no suspension, bobbing skinny tyres on it and riding road, throwing some griffo's on it and riding trail centres, tow paths and bridleways, I won't ever ride sticks pass, torridon or use it for uplifts but for everything In between it's simplicity is quite refreshing

Good to see more real world bikes.

Big tyres are good.
Relaxed angles are good.
Higher bars are good.

It's about time the touring scene got a boot up the arse as well.

Full rack and pannier mounts make so much sense, but I believe weekend toys are also available for those who find practicality a little déclassé.

A soon-to-be graaavel biking event now arriving this summer:

[img] [/img]

I still drive round now seeing a bridleway sign and thinking "I wonder if that links up" checking Google Earth and then riding it

Except that round by me you'd have a torrid time on skinny tyres doing that 🙂

Ah so not really a gravel bike then!

Living near Salisbury Plain (army roads FTW when they aren't lobbing shells), fancied a new road bike but not really into it enough to splash a lot of money on a specific road bike, just sold a Ti bike and realised my nice new carbon hardtail takes a bit of a kicking on rack with the kids bikes, the ability to bit a bit of light touring and camping with the boys, commuting by the route I fancy rather than just the direct road route..

All these and more are why I ended up with a tripster. Actually reduced my bike count and won some garage related brownie points as a result. It's just another sort of bike despite all the recent fuss (but a very nice one at that).

Just worked out my first shot on a MTB (ATB?) was my mate's Muddy Fox Courier, 29 years ago, riding downhill through a couple of feet of snow in the Necropolis. I don't think early MTB was really like "Gravel Biking". RSF is probably closer, although they probably go places that gravel bikers would not.

It is funny how threads pop up on here on things you were pondering. Last weekend, I was out for a quick spin on my Saxon Cross. The weather turned sleety and wet, I was descending on a old farm track that had become quite eroded in parts in all the rain we have had. As I was clattering down some parts of the trail into some unexpected ruts and rocks, I was reminded of what MTB used to be like when I first started in '92, rigid forks, thin tyres, pick a good line.
The reason I got the bike was that many of the trails near me have been clear felled plus had huge amounts of storm damage, fenced off etc. With the time constraints I was under (teens & work travel ), it was nice to head out on the many fire trails near by, that linked with roads to put in a nice loop.
When things calm down, I hope to get back out trail building, in the meantime I will use the crosser.
BTW that Slate is a stupid bike, I keep telling myself, I have no use for one and everyday I think about getting one ,looking at the site.

Molgrips, where are you riding, my 25mm rims are wider than my old MTB rims used to be?

South Wales Valleys.

Yesterday's ride on the rigid 29er included an old green lane with loads of loose rocks (didn't clean although I usually do) with soft sandy bit and later big mud hole, steep heavily rooted fast descent, mud-fest next section of descent, very sharply pointy rocky next descent into muddy slimy bank onto sustained steep rocky climb with slippery slimy rocks (didn't clean this either) onto very steep slippery stony climb onto soft grassy sinky-inny section. Then onto some nice tracks 🙂

Not sure anyone would've managed that on a gravel bike.

All local bridleways, and all the kind of stuff I was riding and exploring 23 years ago.

BTW that Slate is a stupid bike, I keep telling myself, I have no use for one and everyday I think about getting one ,looking at the site.

Molgrips, It sounds like the Peaks used to be, except for the slimy bits, I'd have definitely been off the X bike carrying over that,

The bridleways I'm meandering over cross farmers fields and skirt around the olde Worldly villages as cart tracks long forgotten, mind you judging by the amount of dog bombs on them they don't look too forgotten,

Yeah I can imagine that kind of BW would be perfect. As so often the case on here regional variations can cause disagreements 🙂

Which makes me wonder.. instead of 'gravel' or 'enduro' or other labels - I wonder if we could do geographical categories. A South Downs bike, a Hampshire bike, a Peaks bike etc? 🙂

You have probably just given a marketing team for a manufacturer a great idea there 💡

Molgrips, where are you riding, my 25mm rims are wider than my old MTB rims used to be?

Apparently early stumpjumpers had 1.75 inch rims.

http://mombat.org/MOMBAT/Bikes/1982_Stumpjumper_1055.html

Again its the 1990 where rims went narrow. Thats well after the start of mountain biking

my second MTB had these skinny rims. Just 30mm

[img] [/img]

Mavic 321 was the default wasn't it? IIRC they were remarkably shallow but I think the 21 referred to the width.

Mavic 321 was the default wasn't it? IIRC they were remarkably shallow but I think the 21 referred to the width.

I had one of those. But I think they came in the early 90s