Just reading a review for a 47mm gravel tyre (WTB Sendero) thats basically an mtb tyre (albeit slightly narrower). The new Fox gravel suspension fork caught my eye too.
How long before the flat 'gravel' bar?
Got some news for you
https://www.cyclingabout.com/best-flat-bar-gravel-bikes-2021/
It’ll end with a short travel HT 29er with rubbish geometry and a straight top tube. Or Hybrid if you will
Tell me thats an early April Fools mashr?!
The author of that blog is definitely pretty special.
Yeah that sendero does seem oddly like an mtb tyre. But I guess not all frames can fit larger mtb tyres, even if they are 650b.
So, what IS a ‘gravel bike’?
Please explain.
The author of that blog is definitely pretty special.
Australian guy - spends much of his life on the road touring, he's been all over. He's got an interesting YouTube channel (CyclingAbout). Yes he's a bit opinionated (like most people on YouTube!) but he does know his stuff.
His main touring bike is a Koga with a belt drive and a Rohloff.
So, what IS a ‘gravel bike’?
Please explain.
it’s a road bike adapted to be more suitable for racing on gravel or unsealed roads.
geometry is closer to a racing bike than a touring bike. there is clearance for larger tyres. the BB is lower than a cyclocross bike. they are lighter and not as strong as mountain bikes.
since they became popular there are all kinds of variations on the theme of “gravel bike”, but as far as i’m aware it started with riding and racing road bikes on gravel/unmade roads.
I always assumed they were originally CX bikes that were marketed at ‘adventure’ and that over time evolved into their own little niche thing rather than coming from the road bike side of things.
I’ve not tried it but quite a few of my friends love it and say it compliments their 150-170 trail/Enduro bikes much better than having a full on XC bike now that their longer travel bikes pedal so much better
So, what IS a ‘gravel bike’?
A early/mid 90s geometry mountain bike with road bars isnt it?
Started with using a cx/tourer bike to make fun the stuff modern mountain bikes flattened out and has crept closer and closer to the old mountain bike style over time.
Yes he’s a bit opinionated (like most people on YouTube!) but he does know his stuff.
I think I'd be okay if he didn't confuse his opinions with absolute facts
A early/mid 90s geometry mountain bike with road bars isnt it?
Started with using a cx/tourer bike to make fun the stuff modern mountain bikes flattened out and has crept closer and closer to the old mountain bike style over time
Nah, a beefed up road bike for light off road like bridleways and tow path or gravel tracks. People have just started doing more on them as geo has slackened and they allowed fatter tyres.
Really don't get why some people seem to have an issue with them though. They're great bikes imo.
Wheres the logical conclusion to the gravel trend?
Mine usually ends at my house
What will happen is that they change so much that some one will re-invent a bike that does the job just as well if not better as the current incarnation slid too far away from that point. To pick a point in history, MTBs did the same in the 80's when road bikes became a bit to narrow tyred etc for mixed surface riding. They then devleoped into skill/balls compensators (as current gravel bikes are slowly doing) and someone who wants a challenge will start again but won't go back to zero in the way that MTBs didn't.
So, what IS a ‘gravel bike’?
Please explain.
A bike designed to be efficient on gravel surfaced roads, just as a road bike is a bike designed to be efficient on the road, an XC MTB to be efficient on XC and so on.
Any of those bikes can be used in any of the cases but they become less efficient.
Calling it a gravel bike means it categories it against a road bike or XC MTB.
- Drop bars
- ~40c tyres
- Slightly relaxed road bike geometry
- Larger spread of gears than road bike slightly higher than XC MTB
That allows me to for example look for gravel bikes and I know what I am going to get, i.e. not a road bike and not an XC MTB.
Panniers
Looking at that article above these gravel bikes are almost full circle back to late 80’s early 90’s mtb bar 29 wheels
So long as people are prepared to spend the money on ever increasing niche products then they will continue tk be developed
Fact is you see it here all the time. Person buys a gravel bike based on a utopian dream sold to them by marketeers. Except the UK doesn’t have much gravel so they end up using the dream machine on the road where it’s slow, or on a BW which is a bit rougher than a gravel road and they can’t cope with drops, or actually they are getting older and do t quite find drops comfortable, but they are still living the gravel dream and they have bought a gravel bike…..sort ofl
Or an early 80’s mtb / a hybrid
I think it's reached a logical conclusion already - a fatter-tyred mainly road-going bike that can handle tracks to some extent but isn't really ridden at full pace off-road in the way an MTB might be.
Some of what we're seeing now is the result of brands looking for TNBT or a marketing niche rather than any logical conclusion. Like track bikes used in the city gave us fixed gear freestyle - FGF isn't logical and is pretty much an evolutionary dead-end in bikes, but if you're into it it's great.
Flat bar gravel = a hybrid. The original definition of hybrid was a road/ATB cross over. There's nothing wrong with hybrids and as MTBs get burlier and MTB becomes a powered sport hybrids fill the gap that opens up. The bike industry will always split differences and fill gaps, it's how ranges develop. Whether there's any sense in filling those gaps is another question. Sense, or £.
Gravel evolving into monstercross - not a logical evolution, just a valid niche. Niche I think due to the combo of drop bars and 29" tyres and being slower or more sluggish on road yet not really up to MTB use.
Where I see space for evolution is gravel and touring merging. Some are riding road bikepacking events on 28mm tyres still. A touring-gravel bike is basically the classic randonneur bike. A gravel bike with guards and lights is the same thing with current parts.
I look forward to SRAM and Shimano understanding gearing for these bikes one day, they never have done and still don't imho. That could help the development since the gearing needs are different to other bikes - ideally we'd be closer to the ranges we had on MTBs when 9s triples were the norm. MTB 10s doubles were peak gravel gearing ime and then discontinued.
I have a Kona Dew Deluxe, I've joked on here before that it's a gravel bike without realising it actually is.
I reckon it's value has now quadrupled, easy.
(I paid £150 for it a few years back)
For me it fits in the gap 'below' my trail-HT, which is 'below' my enduro-FS.
Luckily where I live we've loads of gravel plus many trails/routes that are a bit too tame for the trail-HT, but would be horrible on something like a CX bike.
I've 700x50c's on mine, with wide flared & shallow drops.
I don't have a road bike, so it's also used for back lanes and empty B-roads, which again I've going off in every direction. Makes for a nice comfortable & secure ride.
I have bikepacked with a gravel bike, and it's fine when lighter-loaded (B&B/hotel trips) but for the camping trip I've planned for next month in the Highlands, I'm using my trail-HT.
I'm happy with mine, and won't be adding suspension nor a flat bar.
Gravel bikes have been around since the start. They are not a new fad, even the current trend has been going on for the last 8 years (remember this video
?)
They are just another type of bike that have been brought up to date with tweaks on geometry, better gears, hydro brakes etc.....similar to the sort of updates we went through in the 90's with MTB
Remember Coda Brakes anyone?????
So, the end point will be a continuation of improvements in drivetrain, tyres, wheels etc, but the basic principle will remain the same as what Geoff Apps was riding many many moons ago.
Dew Deluxe
It's a hybrid ; )
Same as fat bikes.
They were all the rage, it was not unusual to see a few round any trail center.
Now I very rarely see any. There are clearly the commited few. We mostly don't have enought snow or sand in the UK for many people to need them. I'm in the east midlands. Very little snow and sand here!
I managed 500 miles in two years on my gravel bike. 100 was one weekend.
So it's become my commuter where the fat tyres make the potholes significantly less crashy
Really don’t get why some people seem to have an issue with them though. They’re great bikes imo.
Yeah, it's weird, best idea/bike I've bought in a long time.
Logical conclusion is that everyone has exactly the bike they want for the sort of riding they do, that's it. It might just take a while for that to happen as so many people still seem determined to ride their gravel bikes like MTBs then wonder why they're not very good 😆
For me it's (hopefully) leading to more all round road bikes, road bikes are great but on your average British roads they're too harsh. Having something that is mostly road focussed but the ability to ride some rougher surfaces and be comfy after a long day in the saddle.
There is no single, set definition for "a gravel bike" nor do I think there should be.
I think it's easier to say they are bikes that suit mixed terrain, unpaved roads and loose surfaces but aren't optimised for either jumps/drops/really rough ground or smooth roads with low drag and super aero gains, a bit general but that's sort of the point (IMO).
And yep there are inevitably echos of lots of other pre-existing concepts, lots use drops and/or road parts but also discs and tubeless tyres closer to traditional MTBs...
I've definitely made the early MTB comparison before, and it mainly applies for me in how they feel to ride, when I think back to rattling along forestry trails on a rigid bike with 26x1.95" tyres, unconcerned about head angles or dropper posts...
You might as well ask "what is a Mountain bike?" those have been with us 40+ years and the niches, within niches are still turning up, and a few ideas have been dumped along the way it's all mainly good still...
I sense a desire amongst many to label Gravel bikes as a pointless 'fad' and just a CX or road bike with chunkier tyres, to tear down the idea of "Gravel bikes" for whatever reason. The thing is that term/niche has been with us for almost a decade now, and seems to be growing/evolving a bit so there must be something to it...
I’d say that anything with a rigid fork and or a drop bar will end up being called a gravel bike.
It's the bike I ride on a mixture of road and forest road. From my house I could get to glentress or kielder with probably only 5 miles of tarmac.
Same as fat bikes.
Fat tyre road bikes?
Thing is road bikes are mostly pro race influenced. Since the majority of road riders I see out are far from racing anything, a fat tyre or tougher road bikes that can connect up nicer roads by using a byway or towpath etc is a great option for so many - assuming they're not too pro-race influenced themselves. Get past the image and culture of Road Riding, or the keep-up arms race, and the gravel bike is a viable alternative to a 25mm tyred race bike.
tbh on a lot of the roads I ride my gravel bike averages the same speed - it's faster in places and a bit slower on the open smooth roads.
Maybe the logical conclusion is gravel bikes being sold with smooth road tyres, dropping the 'off road capable' marketing a few notches and the format replacing the trad 25mm road bike for all but aspiring cat/club racers. All Road rather than Gravel.
(ie what dc1988 said while I was posting)
.
There is no single, set definition for “a gravel bike” nor do I think there should be.
imo it's the combination of fairly light mix terrain tyres and drop bars plus the design intent that it's a competent, brisk road bike that can handle light off-road use (light ie vs typical MTB use). It excludes bikes designed primarily for traditional 4-pannier touring which could otherwise fit the description.
If we don't have a definition of some sort then every hybrid since the Raleigh Pioneer and Diamond Back Overdrive is a gravel bike and the terms becomes fairly meaningless. It's a rabbit hole though and the terms are fairly loose.
I sense a desire amongst many to label Gravel bikes as a pointless ‘fad’ and just a CX or road bike with chunkier tyres, to tear down the idea of “Gravel bikes” for whatever reason.
As they are close to a road or CX bike with chunkier tyres I can see why. That doesn't however make them a pointless fad.
I had a road bike and then bought a CX frame. Swapped all the parts over and rode it so only difference was frame, forks and brakes (mini v versus calliper)
The bike really didn't feel any different to the road bike and was no slower or less responsive. Then put on some CX tyres and have my perfect bike. A gravel bike would be very similar again.
Gravel bikes are ace; ride from home on the road, do some local non-technical BWs, return home. They're definitely a compromise, but not sure I'd want to make mine more off-road focused at the expense of of speed on the road by adding massive tyres and suspension, but I can see the see the appeal.
How long before the flat ‘gravel’ bar?
I'm ahead of the curve - I've been describing mine a flat bar gravel bike for years. TBH it's just a bike that's rigid, light, more traditional geometry than current XC bikes, and 700x50 'gravel' tyres.
Logical conclusion?
That people get to ride the bike that suits their locality and riding preference. That n+1 is validated. That shops sell more bikes.
IMO, it is more people on more bikes which is a good thing.
I couldn't care what the latest marketing is on it.
Funny that people keep describing them as 'funny little niche' things when they seem to fill a pretty big hole in the bike spectrum.
Bikes that are niche. Cyclocross , with cyclocross geometry
A early/mid 90s geometry mountain bike with road bars isnt it?
Could be? Have you actually compared the geometry? Have they just scaled the same early 90s geo up for bigger wheels? I'm not convinced BTW, just wondered if someone had out the time in and compared.
One of the reasons I say this is because around 2008 and before I’d ever seen a drop bar ‘MTB’ I’d tried to convert a couple of early/mid 90s MTBs for my type of riding which was/is/always was mainly rough roads, trails and minor roads (but able to tackle the odd gnarly section)
I didn't use drop bars because it never occurred to me. But I wanted skicker tyres for quicker surfaces and also bar ends to give me the ‘on the hoods’ position.
My first attempt was some Kenda 26er hybrid tyres on a 1993 Raleigh Apex K2
Because of the oldskool geo (low front, long stem?) I felt way too bunched over the front wheel and so bought something like 
It was like a tank and weird but fun. Had more speedy gravelish luck with a 1997 (iirc?) RSP/M-Trax MTB and out it on an XT diet, hand-built wheels with a long riser stem and adding bar-ends and pedal cages with toestraps, 26x 1.75 Marathon Racers. That thing was comparatively quick. Looked into drop bars but conversion was a faff and shifters = £££
FFWD 2016 and I saw a Genesis Vagabond ‘adventure bike’ outside a bike shop while taking a lunch-break stroll. It reminded me of my ATB roots but had some nice wide drop bars. Curious and immediately quite taken with it I grabbed a demo and was hooked so bought it. It felt similar (but better) in many ways to the bike I had been trying to make happen with my older 26er MTBs, hybrid tyres and bar ends.
Still haven’t compared geometry though. And I’m fairly sure a Vagabond (monster-cross?) vs, say, a Diverge (gravel) would bear as little resemblance to each other as they would to that ‘93 Raleigh Apex or the ‘97 M-Trax.
Maybe my M-Trax would resemble a 26er precursor to the Vagabond most of all, which would make sense seeing as I replaced it with the Vagabond 👍🏼
(Which has since been replaced with 2 bikes - ie a rigid 29er and a retro audax/tourer)
I don’t think I can do the one bike thing but if I could it would be a fantasy lightweight monstercross with two wheelsets and some shenanigans that allow simple and quick drops-flat bar changes.
The one bike to ‘do it all’ depends on a lot of things. The Vagabond was the closest I got to that and yes it did feel somewhat like a (more spacious) late 90s MTB with drops, but so much better. I’d put that down to both geometry and bigger wheels? Here quick and dirty compare
Head and seat tube seem almost the same. BB has dropped. Fork offset obv increased. Massive standover increase although the M-Trax was approx 19” and the Vagabond approx 18”
Why are people so keen to sneer at them?
They are a massive growth part of the cycling scene and potentially a gateway drug to MTBing.
As someone who had a couple of CX bikes but wasn't that impressed, I'm finally starting to see that a newer gravel bikes could really work for me - and I suspect development might plateau a bit now (as it will in MTB geometry).
Why are people so keen to sneer at them?
Indeed. IMHO they're ideal second bikes for someone who also has a MTB (As if anyone on here only has n=1). Commuting, going to the shops, riding round to see a friend, gentle rides with the kids etc. All the stuff that you want a generic bike for, but don't want to take your (expensive?) MTB out.
The line they have to toe is not to stray too far towards MTB territory. At some point, they just become rubbish MTBs which misses the point entirely.
The line they have to toe is not to stray too far towards MTB territory. At some point, they just become rubbish MTBs which misses the point entirely.
It’s almost like no-one remembers ATB 😉
In which respect, calling what is essentially an ATB with drops a ‘rubbish MTB’ is surely also missing the/a point? I suppose one might have a case for ‘rubbish ATB’, but my (flat bar) ATB was a bit rubbish on tarmac to be honest, although in general I had much more fun on it than the road bike it replaced.
#ATBFORLIFE
#1989allofthetime
logical conclusion? I don't really care. Gravel bikes have made my local trails interesting again, my modern mtb is so efficient it makes the tame local stuff almost boring. riding the same routes on my gravel bike is similar to riding a 90s mtb if you mean narrow tyres, narrow bars and a "xc" head angle. Gravel bikes have put the fun back into local riding and the challenge of riding them where they are not designed to work makes it even better.
I am biased though I suppose because of running https://ukgravelco.com/
I think those that want to knock gravel bikes, are the same people that sneer at road bikes. They see drop bars and assume they're just ridden by angry mamils, rather than super rad MTBers who schralp brown pow and give each other high fives at the end of each trail centre section. They don't see people just getting out there and going for a ride in the countryside.
My 'gravel bike' is a Planet X London Road, bought as a commuter about 8 years ago but the extra tyre cleanrance and disc brakes mean't that I could chose different routes to work so I didn't get bored on the same stretch of road all the time. Even without commuting nowadays (WFH) it's still my most used bike. Where I live theres loads of non techy bridleways and canal tow paths so its ideal. I keep thinking of getting a newer gravel bike that could take 50mm tyres like the Sonder Camino but the LR is great.
My current gravel bike is more like a MTB than some of my early MTB's 🙂 47c tubeless, proper suspension that actually works at both ends...
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/SRbr5g5T/641-B812-D-2820-4-C30-A027-D07024018-E1-A.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/SRbr5g5T/641-B812-D-2820-4-C30-A027-D07024018-E1-A.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
the UK doesn’t have much gravel
Not the first time I've read this. I'll warrant the UK has many more gravel miles than trail centre miles, by several orders of magnitude.
As for the naming convention, I'm happy with it. Selling bikes 12-13 years ago we had lots of folk asking for Cross bikes. Of course they didn't really want to be limited to 32c tyres, or to have racy handling, but that was the closest thing we had. Differentiation by "inventing" a new name helped massively and allowed designs to escape from the CX racing stranglehold that had held them back.
Flat bars? Yeah, why not. There's room for everything but, again, names are useful and I reckon the vast majority of folk expect a gravel bike to feature drop bars. The American manufacturers were using the name Fitness Bikes for sort of flat barred road bikes. Maybe we need to use something like that.
As someone who had a couple of CX bikes but wasn’t that impressed, I’m finally starting to see that a newer gravel bikes could really work for me
Can't really see why they would be much different. The geo differs by 10mm at most between say a Giant TCX advanced and a Giant Revolt advanced in size medium.
Gravel bike has 1 degree diff in head tube, 0.5 in seat tube, 10mm longer wheelbase and 10 more BB drop. Differences yes but hardly a completely different bike and once ridden for a few miles I wouldn't care which one I was riding and would be happy on either.
proper suspension that actually works at both ends
Yeah, I appreciate that the more elderly types need their comforts.
Yeah, I appreciate that the more elderly types need their comforts
🙂 aye, you should know !
The line they have to toe is not to stray too far towards MTB territory. At some point, they just become rubbish MTBs which misses the point entirely.
Agreed.
imo if it has drop bars it needs to be a decent road bike first, then stretch the off-road ability as far as you can until you snap to a rigid 29er with MTB bars as a better bike if doing a lot of off-road riding.
There isn't a way to make a good* road bike also work as a good* technical off-road bike (because of positioning, weight distro, the way we corner etc) so there's compromises to make.
*say, something fairly close to the benchmark of the type for a non-racer rider.
@jameso - I've ended up coming at this from the other direction. With a 29er that can run with front suspension or rigid, I reckon that the rigid option just makes for a worse gravel bike. So, if the route doesn't warrant suspension, the gravel bike just makes more sense. I do appreciate that it's not the same for everyone and what I might categorise as fun - trying to descend rough tracks and footpaths as well as I can - others might see as tediously slow. But then if I just wanted to be as quick as possible I'd be on full suspension.
In much the same way as most MTB innovation is now just trickle-in, there's no real "WOW!" new stuff anymore, I think gravel will end up the same.
What really started it or allowed it to grow was reliable tubeless tyres and wheels plus disc brakes. Without either of those, it would never have become A Thing.
I think you can evolve it into ever more distinct niches - dropper posts will be there on some of the bikes, rack/pannier mounts on some, short travel suspension might make a limited appearance but from here on it's more or less a gradual refinement.
It's almost taken the "pure" CX machine and just made it a bit more versatile, kind of like the pure XC race MTB was adapted over the years to make it more capable all-round.
And some of it is marketing. I suspect if you called it a drop-bar hybrid, no-one would ever have bought one!
I look at it this way: gravel bikes are better than road bikes off road. And better than mountain bikes on road. One of the reasons they're better on the road is that they have drop handlebars, which makes them different and arguably better than hybrids.
They exist in that floating bubble between the two zones, where if they become markedly better at either - road or off road - they stop being what they are and become compromised road or mountain bikes. Maybe.
Of course that also means that they're worse off road than a mountain bike and not as good, at least with bigger, non-slick tyres, on road as a road bike. But if that's how you see it, you'll probably steer clear anyway.
The logical conclusion is that they'll bobble along in their compromise bubble with small tweaks like droppers and token suspension and people will start with the 'aggro gravel' stuff and similar pointless labels.
Not the first time I’ve read this. I’ll warrant the UK has many more gravel miles than trail centre miles, by several orders of magnitude.
Was going to say exactly this, even in the south there's miles upon miles of bridleways/forest roads which are perfect for gravel bikes.
Can’t really see why they would be much different.
Bigger clearances for wider, tubeless tyres.
Associated room for MTB-style mudguards to keep mud out of rider's face.
Hydro disc brakes being much more widespread now.
Well I just ordered one because my old-style road bike is not so great on muddy lanes (25mm tyre max) and won't take proper mudguards or disc brakes. I also have a trail bike and a hardtail (not exactly a hardcore hardtail, but not XC either).
The decision to get a gravel bike rather than a modern road bike was easy - I don't race on roads, and where I ride there are plenty of smooth-ish off-road tracks to link the tarmac up and visit some nice hills and forests to boot. But I chose a gravel bike with relatively road like geometry, because most of its miles will be tarmac.
I anticipate the downside will be that in said forests are some tasty trails, so as I zoom past on my drop bars I will be thinking "if only I was on my other bike I could dive into the woods here for some fun". But a bike up to the trails (tyres in particular) would take a while to ride out there on, so it would be a bike in car job. It bothers me to drive to ride when I could ride there in an hour or so, but I realise I just have to decide which type of riding I want to do.
I’ve ended up coming at this from the other direction. With a 29er that can run with front suspension or rigid, I reckon that the rigid option just makes for a worse gravel bike. So, if the route doesn’t warrant suspension, the gravel bike just makes more sense. I do appreciate that it’s not the same for everyone and what I might categorise as fun – trying to descend rough tracks and footpaths as well as I can – others might see as tediously slow. But then if I just wanted to be as quick as possible I’d be on full suspension.
Makes a lot of sense and I suppose my MTB is similar, it's as close to being a passable road/gravel bike as I can tolerate with while still being a great bike on anything technical - it's not a fast great technical bike, it just handles well and is fun.
Bigger clearances for wider, tubeless tyres.
Associated room for MTB-style mudguards to keep mud out of rider’s face.
Hydro disc brakes being much more widespread now.
Disc braked CX bikes have clearance for big tyres these days. They run 33c because of UCI stipulation rather than frame limitation which covers the first two points
They also have hydro disc brakes which covers the third point.
As I said, not really much difference between the two and the small differences are just that.
The logical conclusion is that they’ll bobble along in their compromise bubble
As someone who never has more than one bike at a time I have spent the last 30 years bobbling along in a compromise bubble. May explain why I am not so picky about minor differences in bikes.
Disc braked CX bikes have clearance for big tyres these days
I meant CX bikes eight years ago when gravel wasn't really such a thing.
They run 33c because of UCI stipulation rather than frame limitation which covers the first two points
True, but since most high-end road/Cx bikes are based on the version the pros are racing, the consequence of this is that any sort of 'race-bred' CX frame is optimised for racing and typically doesn't have the clearance, since adding more clearance will necessarily compromise it (slightly) for its narrow design brief. Even though that sometimes means a version that's also compromised for the sort of riding most people are doing.
Relatively few 'Cx' frames have clearance for 40mm + guards, or 50mm tyres. Things like mudguard / rack mounts are also absent. Or, to put it another way, you can have those things but the manufacturer will call it a gravel bike.
Disc braked CX bikes have clearance for big tyres these days.
Almost no-one is making CX bikes these days, so there's a stumbling block immediately.
I think that they will continue to become more off-road capable, to the point that they will turn into exactly the same as mountain bikes. They will be labeled as 'Soil Bikes' but cunningly sold in different shops to mountain bikes so people won't make the connection. And being suckers for marketing, some people will buy a mountain bike and soil bike from the same company but different shops. They will be stored side by side in the heated garage next to the Audi, and yet the rider will never spot the fact that they are the same model with different stickers 😀
I have a Kona Dew Deluxe, I’ve joked on here before that it’s a gravel bike without realising it actually is.
An undersung bike that, it literally was ahead of the curve. I loved mine.
it was a mash up of a deluxe and a drop... making it the DewDropDeluxe, might use that as a band name.
It’s a hybrid ; )
Nope, clearly a flat bar gravel 😋
A colleague was telling me about a 50km gravel route in Hamsterley Forest which doesn't use any track twice, which he'd downloaded from a club website. I thought it sounded familiar so I went and looked, and it was indeed a route a mate had put together 15 years ago to be more like 90s MTBing as he wasn't into ladder drops and such - https://www.hamsterley-trailblazers.co.uk/index.php/rides-trails/trail-guides/the-hamsterley-half-century
I then looked at his Strava and he'd recently done a gravel ride in Swaledale which was over the same tracks I rode on a 90s MTB in the 90s.
So, I'm not saying that gravel bikes are just 90s MTBs, but gravel riding is just 90s MTBing.
So, I’m not saying that gravel bikes are just 90s MTBs, but gravel riding is just 90s MTBing.
The guy who runs my LBS says exactly this.
Actually it's quite amusing if you read any of the old Tim Woodcock "MTB touring" books or (even older) the Jeremy Ashcroft route guide and MTBing was all about finding a gravel track (ideally slightly downhill) to "blast along". You'd then carry your bike to the summit of the next long fireroad descent. Even some of the very early Vertebrate Graphics route guide books do the same.
Almost exactly the opposite to the way MTBing went which was to winch up a gravel climb then plummet down the steep / twisty/ gnarly singletrack.
I think for the majority of mountain bike riders (not people on here) the former may still be true, not everyone is doing 10ft gap jumps or enduro racing. Apart from when I'm at a trail center with my kids I still ride what you'd consider 80's/early 90's mountain bike routes, they are still there. A flat barred gravel bike is sometimes the better option for those routes and with modern MTBing gearing you can climb the ups as well. Only now your rims don't wear away in weeks and you don't have to carry a headset spanner to use after every descent.
I loved doing Tim's Scottish coast to coast and Derek Purdy's off road C2C back in the mid 90s. Maybe I was gravel riding and didn't know it.
I found Tim Woodcock's Wessex Way guidebook the other day, looks like a cracking gravel ride.
Only now your rims don’t wear away in weeks and you don’t have to carry a headset spanner to use after every descent.
Haha, and I used to have to reattach my cranks a couple of times each ride as well.
Only now your rims don’t wear away in weeks and you don’t have to carry a headset spanner to use after every descent.
Haha, and I used to have to reattach my cranks a couple of times each ride as well.
Disk brakes, aheadsets and reliable cranks are definitely an improvement over the parts on 90s MTBs.
Almost no-one is making CX bikes these days, so there’s a stumbling block immediately.
Who cares, the comparison was with a Giant TCX and a Giant Revolt which was a good comparison from a company that makes both and the differences between them are very small.
As a reminder my post was to someone who rode a CX bike and didn't like it but expected a gravel bike to ride much better. I am saying it won't be all that different, mainly because it isn't all that different, especially as pretty much any CX bike these days will take a 45c or more tyre. Even my old mini v braked race CX bike could take much bigger than 45c on frame clearance alone and it is only the brake cable stopping it.
Last week I was glorying in the purity of my narrow tyred rigid bike.
Now it's all dried out , it's a bone rattling pile of poo.
Full bounce for me til the mud comes back.
i owned a gravel bike briefly (or similar) when i lived in the New Forest. it was great, much more pleasant than a mountain bike in that, rolling-at-best terrain.
where i now live is predominantly winch and plummet riding. climb a forest service road then descend a mountain bike trail.
some of the forest service roads go on for miles (and miles). gravel bikes are popular with people who are looking for an alternative to the usual “laps” style of riding. if i had the time (which is code for fitness) i’d love to head off for a multi-day ride through the mountains on a gravel bike.
edit: as for the logical conclusion, as has been said above, the refinement of the category and sub categories until there is a great bike for every application.
As a reminder my post was to someone who rode a CX bike..............
Ah fair enough. I skim read through most of the comments because these ridiculous threads appear so regularly that no-one ever has anything original to say. Including me, it seems. 😀
So, I’m not saying that gravel bikes are just 90s MTBs, but gravel riding is just 90s MTBing.
If we hadn't been so into stupidly narrow bars back then we wouldn't be saying this now : )
I can't do what I did on my MTB in late 80s on my gravel bike, and it's not about being 35 years older : )
MTBs back in late 80s had fairly big bars and ok weren't great technically but they jumped, downhilled and went down really steep stuff better than a drop bar gravel bike. Well, unless maybe you made a gravel bike that is LLS geo and drop bars, but that would fall foul of my rule that it should be a good road bike too and not just a rigid MTB with bad bars for MTBing. And admittedly that's a daft rule anyway. A flat bar gravel bike is a better MTB than we had BITD, that's for sure. It'd have decent width flat bars for starters.
As a reminder my post was to someone who rode a CX bike and didn’t like it but expected a gravel bike to ride much better. I am saying it won’t be all that different, mainly because it isn’t all that different, especially as pretty much any CX bike these days
Mate, I've already told you I was comparing MY old CX bikes (10 years old) with current gravel bikes.
I can’t do what I did on my MTB in late 80s on my gravel bike,
Well, I've been trying to avoid the words Sl C******r, but if the (flat) shoe fits...
So, I’m not saying that gravel bikes are just 90s MTBs, but gravel riding is just 90s MTBing.
I have no idea why people think we just rode gentle bridleways and tracks in the 90s. I was young, and I was doing the most technical things I could find as fast as I could, as were all the other young people I knew. Sure, there were rides with lots of jeep tracks over mountains, but we didn't plan a ride without some rough descent taken flat out.
A flat bar gravel bike is a better MTB than we had BITD
My current El Mariachi is a much much better MTB than I had back in the day because it has:
Discs
Modern drivetrain
High sweep bars (admittedly these might've been available BITD)
2.35 tubeless tyres at half the pressure
23mm rims
29 inch wheels
A dropper
A tendency to drift nicely in corners instead of the front wheel washing out on any fast corner
A tendency not to dump me over the bars on drop offs
but we didn’t plan a ride without some rough descent taken flat out.
Yeah, but the problem was that connecting the 3 stretches of 200m of interesting track took 20 miles of wide, gravelly bridleway and roads. 😀
Yeah, but the problem was that connecting the 3 stretches of 200m of interesting track took 20 miles of wide, gravelly bridleway and roads.
Not round my way.
Sure there is a lot more tech now, but it was still around then.
