Do Cyclists Make Better Drivers?

In the 1954 safety education film, Drive Your Bike, a group of adolescent boys learn from their coach about how thinking like a driver would help them be better, safer bicyclists -- and how being better bicyclists would help them become better drivers when the time came. The movie's car-centric message was fairly typical of bike safety films from the era -- implying that bicycles are for kids, while adults drive cars (at least the "normal" ones did).

"Always use your head and think about safety," says the coach. "By starting now and learning to drive your bikes, you'll be able to drive an automobile when you're old enough. And you'll be able to do a good safe job of it."

I've poked fun at the stiff monotone delivery of that movie's lessons, and while it's doubtful that the filmmakers in the '50s ever expected that anyone would continue to ride a bike after they'd get their drivers' license, there's definitely something to the idea that being a good bicyclist makes someone a better driver. I'll bet most people reading this would agree. And now an insurance company has come around to the same conclusion.

On the website for Carinsurance4cyclists.com, which appears to be U.K.-based, the insurance firm cites a number of reasons why bicyclists earn lower rates. "Your on-road cycling experience has made you more alert and road aware than the average car driver and that deserves special attention," says the company.

from carinsurance4cyclists.

"Improved Spatial Awareness. In town or in the countryside you'll be more aware of how you fit into your surroundings and ride or drive accordingly."

"Road Alert. Your experience on your bike means you're more alert to the dangers of road use and better able to anticipate hazards."

"Healthy Lifestyle. Physical fitness means you value your body. It also suggests improved mental agility and that makes you a more responsive driver."

As a lifetime bicyclist, as well as an occasional motorcyclist, I absolutely agree with that. I really believe that either type of cyclist learns to be more observant of their surroundings -- looking farther ahead, being more aware of blind spots, and spotting (and reacting to) dangers earlier. A cyclist develops senses that car-centric drivers never know about.

Here's an example. I was in my car, driving on a wide highway towards one of the major shopping-and-dining areas in our locale. There were two traffic lanes in both directions, separated by a turn lane in the middle. I was in the left lane, with another car just to my right-side rear quarter, and we were approaching an intersection with a traffic light which was green. Approaching the intersection from the opposite direction was a car with a young woman driving, and she had just moved into the turn lane to make a left turn.

It sounds weird to say it, because cars don't have "body language" exactly, but something about the approaching car told me that the driver was going to make the left turn despite the fact that two cars were coming right for her going about 45 mph. I was close enough to the oncoming left-turning car that I could literally see the driver through her windshield. I could see her face, and I could see her eyes looking ahead -- but something told me that even though she appeared to be looking right at us, it was as if she didn't see us coming.

All of this was happening in a fraction of a second, yet it was almost like time and everything slowed down around me. I instinctively started moving my foot from the accelerator to the brake, and sure enough, at that moment, she started turning just as I'd predicted. I was already reacting, slowing hard enough to feel my anti-lock brakes pulse, while I was making a quick evasive "S-maneuver" around her car and then back into my lane. The driver to my right, caught completely off-guard, slammed into her with full force, sending her car into a 360-degree spin that I could see happening in my peripheral vision. A third car was also involved in the pileup. After I pulled off the road in a safe spot, I found myself running back to the scene to check on everyone involved while phoning 911. Paramedics took one driver away, but luckily nobody sustained life-changing injuries.

Of everyone involved in the incident, being out in front I had the least time to react, yet I was the one who was able to avoid the crash.

Yes, this is totally anecdotal and hardly objective "proof," but I have no doubt that the fact that I was able to predict and react the way I did was helped by my experiences as a cyclist -- who is typically a more vulnerable road user. And I'd be willing to bet that many people reading this have similar stories to share.

On a related note, RoadCC also ran a story recently on this car insurance discount. I read in the comments section something that just has to be the greatest blog comment and expression of British slang that I've ever read:

"Certainly I drive less like a monumental cockwomble since starting to cycle regularly."

Oh my god, I love that. It sums it all up so perfectly.

Not everybody out there would agree that we cyclists drive better. The RoadCC article also cites a trucking company director who claims that "lorry drivers (that's 'trucks' to us yanks) are the best users of the road while cyclists are the worst." Of course we'd probably all disagree loudly, but I'd love to see some objective studies on the idea that cyclists really do drive better, as such studies might lead to more insurance companies recognizing us with better rates.

By the way - how does carinsurance4cyclists determine that a person really is a cyclist, and not just someone checking a box to get a discount? Apparently it is necessary to be a member of one of the U.K.'s cycling clubs. I suppose that works. I recall that I used to get a break on my motorcycle insurance for belonging to the American Motorcycle Association (AMA) and for having completed a sanctioned motorcycle-riding course.

It would be great if more insurance companies, like some of those here in the U.S., followed that lead.

How about it, Flo?

In the meantime, I can't stop thinking of a phrase that needs to become a part of eveyone's lexicon, and would even make a great t-shirt or bumper sticker:

Don't be a MONUMENTAL COCKWOMBLE. Ride a bike.

Old Is Good: Specialized Triple Cranks

In the mid 1970s, Mike Sinyard started Specialized Bicycle Imports, which (as the name implied) was an importer of bicycles and components - particularly from Italy at first, then later from Japan. The name was later shortened to simply Specialized, and as anybody reading this already knows, they are now one of the giants of the industry. From a retrogrouchy perspective, there isn't much among the company's current offerings to get very excited about. But in the early and mid '80s, they offered a line of really nice Japanese-built bikes, and a nearly full range of components designed by the company and manufactured to very high quality standards in Japan. Stems and handlebars from Nitto. Hubs from Sunshine/Sansin. Cranks from Sugino. Pedals from MKS. Bottom brackets and headsets from Tange. And don't forget the tires, which were among the first really good clinchers available for high-performance bikes. About the only thing they didn't offer was derailleurs. In most cases, the components were more than just re-labeled pieces from their respective manufacturers, but were unique designs made to very high specifications.

Just as a little point about how nice the bicycles were, who among Retrogrouch Blog readers wouldn't start salivating like one of Pavlov's dogs over a mid-'80s mint condition red Specialized Allez SE with SunTour Superbe components, just like the bikes from the 1985 film American Flyers? . . . Exactly. Also, I have one of the early Stumpjumpers with the lugged frame and twin-plate fork crown, and the workmanship on that frame is fantastic.

Anyhow, as I'm gathering up components for a bike build, I thought I'd take a close look at one of my favorite triple cranksets - the Specialized ST, sometimes known as the "flag" crank because of the logo engraved on the arms. It's a really well-designed crank - simple, pretty, and strong. I've used them on a few bike builds over the years, whether built for myself or for others.

It's the kind of design that looks good on a bike whether new or old.

I was able to get some info about the cranks from Jim Merz, who had been one of the pioneering framebuilders in the Portland, Oregon bike scene until he went to work for Specialized as a product designer in 1982. He has also been a "Master Frame Builder" for the company. Jim was the designer of these cranks, and many other high-quality components. According to Jim, the cranks were cold forged, using the strongest alloys available, and with rings made from 7075 T6 aluminum - the same as was used by Campagnolo. As mentioned, the cranks were manufactured for Specialized by Sugino.

One thing about the crank is that, when it was created in the early '80s, it was on the leading curve of a design trend that would come to define the decade. Notice the smooth "aero" look, the deeply beveled arms, and the low-profile junction where the arm meets the spider -- as opposed to the steep-shouldered, more "squared off" look of many earlier cranks. It also used a fairly short BB spindle compared to most triple cranks. It was not only nice-looking, but was also very strong. The design was such as to help minimize possible built-in stress risers that could lead to cracking over time.

As a contrast, the sharp transition between the arm and the spider on this old Campagnolo crank serves as a stress riser, where cracks could develop. Lots of old Campy cranks suffer this fate. With continued use, a crack like this could eventually break all the way through. (photo, minus added text, from fixed.org.au forum)

The style of the crank would become very familiar through the decade as many other cranks would have a similar design in the '80s. SunTour cranks (also made by Sugino), Shimano, Sakae, and others would adopt the smooth, low-profile look. In fact, some of Sugino's current model cranks, such as the Alpina (shown left) still have the same basic style, even 30 years later.

Another detail about the crank that makes it very versatile is its 110/74 bolt circle diameter (BCD). Though that would quickly become the most common standard for triple cranks for the next couple of decades, it was still a pretty fresh development when this crank was designed.

The crank used the 110/74 BCD which means that chainrings are easy to find, even today.

About that 110/74 BCD Standard:

In the 1970s, as long-distance touring bikes gained popularity (especially after the epic Bikecentennial ride of 1976), and then at the end of the decade when mountain bikes were in their infancy, finding a good wide-range triple crank with seriously low gearing wasn't so easy. There were numerous "standards" for bolt circle diameter, and very little compatibility between different brands. One of the more popular choices for tourists and early mountain bikers was the TA Cyclotourist -- not necessarily because they loved the crank so much (it had some idiosyncrasies) but because it could be had with a then-diminutive 26 tooth granny ring. The TA had a tiny 50.4 mm BCD onto which the biggest chainring bolted. Then the middle and inner rings bolted directly onto the outer ring with an 80 mm bolt circle. One downside of the crank was that the space between the rings and the crank arm was so narrow that it could create interference with some front derailleurs. And the whole thing bolted together with a confusing mess of different sized nuts and bolts. Also, larger chainrings on the TA crank could lack stiffness. The bigger the ring, the more it could flex. Still, for many people, and for quite a while, it was the best thing going.

Stronglight had certain models that were very similar to (or interchangeable with) the TA Cyclotourist, but they also had other, more modern triple cranks (their model 99 comes to mind, for example) that used a proprietary 86 mm BCD. Those were also copied by Sakae Ringyo (SR) and used on some of Trek's early touring bikes. They were decent triple cranks, but the smallest chainring one could install was 28 teeth. Low, but not low enough for some tourists and mountain bikers.

When Shimano released its original Deore group in 1981, which was intended to be a premium group for touring bikes, the first generation Deore crank copied the 50.4 BCD used by TA. But in typical Shimano fashion (does not play well with others), only the outer ring was interchangeable with the TA Cyclotourist. The middle and inner rings used a proprietary 85 BCD, making them compatible with nothing else. It also meant that the lowest gear was limited to 28 teeth.

In 1982, Sugino released the AT triple crank. "AT" stood for "Aero Tour" but it probably wasn't a coincidence that it was just like "TA" backwards. The AT had the outer and middle rings bolted to a 110 mm circle, which could accept rings as small as 34 teeth (They also offered rings as large as 53 teeth, but nowadays it's hard to find them larger than 50). A second set of threaded holes was set into the spider with a 74 mm bolt circle, which could accept a granny ring as small as 24 teeth. Altogether it was a good combination. The larger rings still got plenty of support, avoiding the flex that would come with a smaller bolt circle. Middle rings could be as small as 34, and the 24 tooth granny ring was about the lowest gear anybody was offering at the time. I remember a number of bikes in the '80s, especially sport-touring models, that came with 110/74 cranks that were set up as doubles. Turning them into triples if the owner wished was a simple operation. The cult-bike Bridgestone XO-1 came equipped like that, too.

As Jim Merz tells me, he designed the Specialized crank in 1983, using the same 110/74 BCD. Sakae got a version on the market very quickly. When Shimano redesigned their Deore crank, around '84, they made a rare choice to adopt 110/74 as well. Pretty soon many in the industry were embracing a common standard for triple cranks. Even TA started making cranks and rings to the standard. And there was much rejoicing.

As usual, the idea of common standards has gone out the window, and cranks today are all over the place. Innovations such as MicroDrive in the '90s made bolt circles and chainrings even smaller (more ground clearance for mountain bikes, I guess), and now more and more cranks have discontinued 5-bolt spiders in favor of 4-bolt versions - many with their own unique asymmetrical bolt patterns, and others with removable spiders. But luckily 110/74 rings were once very common and can still be found today without trouble.

The ST-4:

The ST triple crank had a less expensive sibling, designated as the ST-4. Overall, the cranks looked very similar, with the most obvious difference being the logo. However, the real difference between the two was not in the logo, but in the manufacturing. The ST crank was cold-forged out of the strongest available aluminum alloy, whereas the ST-4 was made by the process known as gravity casting -- sometimes mistakenly called "melt forging" but there is a difference. Read on . . .

That's the cold-forged ST on the left, and its similar-looking sibling (minus rings) on the right. The model designations are marked on the back, but the logo ("flag" vs. "S") is a quick identifier.

Cold Forging vs. Hot Forging vs. Gravity Casting vs. Melt Forging

They're all fine ways to make a bicycle crank, but differences in methods and materials affect the strength - and differences in the manufacturing cost obviously affect the price. A really good description of all the methods can be found in the 1992 Bridgestone catalog, but here's a quick summary:

Cold forging starts with the strongest alloys, and requires several major wallops (not a technical term) with hardened forging dies with tons of weight and pressure -- as in, hundreds of tons. Cold forging imparts a grain structure that makes the component very strong, but the tooling and equipment mean more expense. Very few bicycle component makers can afford the massive forging "hammers," and therefore most actually have their cold forging outsourced to specialists. Because of the added strength, cold forged components, like cranks, can be made sleeker and lighter. By the way, Jan Heine's blog had an interesting article last year about forging hammers and the companies that do such work (HERE).

Hot forging involves alloys that are slightly lower in strength than cold forging (though still very strong), heating them to make them softer, then giving them typically one or two hard wallops in the forging dies. It still imparts a grain structure to the component so the parts are very strong, but it takes fewer wallops and less tooling so the cost is lower.

Gravity casting and melt forging both involve melting alloys that start out as somewhat lower strength from either of the previously described methods - but between the two, gravity casting uses a stronger alloy than melt forging. In gravity casting, the molten metal is poured into a mold, then allowed to cool slowly while any air bubbles that might be present gravitate upward and out. In melt forging, the molten metal is forced into a mold under pressure, then liquid-cooled quickly. It is the fastest method and probably requires the least expensive tooling, though the material is not necessarily as strong, nor do the parts develop the same kind of grain structure. For that reason, melt-forged components tend to be "chunkier" to make up for it. Melt forged components also don't take to anodizing, so the finished products are often painted or powder coated. It goes without saying that melt forging is the least expensive of the described methods.

By the way, the '92 Bridgestone catalog says that the Specialized ST-4 crank was gravity cast, but then got extra strength by being whacked in a forging die for good measure. How cool is that?

Cranks in the Vintage Market:

If you're looking at either of these Specialized cranks on the vintage marketplace, like eBay, keep in mind that the prices will vary more by condition than by the model of crank. Most buyers and sellers on eBay or elsewhere probably don't really know the difference between the two versions, nor do they know or care what the things sold for when new. A really clean ST-4  will probably sell for more than a badly scuffed ST, regardless of what the original prices might have been. It's good to know what you're getting, though. Sometimes I see these selling for $100 or more, but unless it's unused, mint-in-the-box, I'd say that's ridiculous. Clean used examples like the ones shown above can often be found for under $50.

Old Is Good: Shimano Deore MT60

As I'm picking out components for an upcoming project (there will be more on the project later - patience, please) I pulled out this near-mint condition Deore rear derailleur (RD-MT60, in Shimano-ese) from either '87 or '88. It was taken off another project bike some years ago and put into a box to wait for the right bike to come along.

Probably the best mountain bike derailleur of its time, but
looks perfectly at home on road bikes, too.

I've always been a SunTour guy, but this Deore MT60 represents a pretty great "modern" derailleur, made at just the time when Shimano was thoroughly establishing their dominance of the bicycle component market. It was nicely styled, without a lot of the typical Shimano gimmickry, and built to last under harsh conditions. Though made primarily for mountain bikes, its simple all-silver finish looked good on road bikes too.

The 1987 Deore MT60 was one of the first indexing mountain bike derailleurs (SunTour released their indexing Accushift line for both road and MTBs that same year), on the heels of Shimano's successful indexing road derailleurs, the Dura Ace 7400 and 600EX SIS of 1985 and '86 respectively. Deore had first been introduced in 1981 as a high-end touring group, but its real impact was in the burgeoning mountain bike market. The MT60  was the first in the Deore line to incorporate the slant-parallelogram design first patented by SunTour, then adopted by Shimano after SunTour's patent expired. It also used the spring-loaded upper pivot that Shimano had already been known for, which contributed to quick, crisp shifting. This derailleur brought the performance of Dura Ace to mountain/touring bikes, in a sturdier package with more seals, etc.

One of the great things about this derailleur is that it will shift crisply and smoothly over a wide range - at least as well as the great old SunTour GT models. But being made for mountain bike duties, it should also prove very durable. Ironically, for a long time, it was SunTour that had simple, functional derailleur designs, and Shimano that seemed to go for gimmicks and "innovations" that were like answers to questions nobody asked. But after SunTour had a string of early '80s mis-steps, like the self-destructing Mountech, or other overly complex "Tech"-series derailleurs, such as the Superbe Tech, or the weird 3-pulley LeTech, suddenly it was Shimano that seemed like the solid, stable choice. This Deore just epitomized that.

So, do I care that this derailleur can index-shift? Not a bit - but in general, a derailleur that works well with indexing levers will also shift beautifully with friction levers. I plan to use it with some old SunTour ratcheting bar-end shifters.

Compared with what would come later, this old Deore is a classic-looking piece of equipment. And while it was only designed for 6-speed gearing (it would probably work fine on 7 or even 8-speeds - not that it matters) its performance should be as good as anything made currently.

Just for laughs, let's take a look at what the Deore looks like today:

The current-generation Deore looks like it was designed by a Japanese Animé cartoonist. Can anyone imagine bolting this thing onto a road bike today?

Obviously, the components for road and mountain bikes have diverged considerably since 1988. If someone wants a current model wide-range derailleur that won't look out of place on an older road bike, what do they do?

Amidst a line full of monstrous-looking mountain bike derailleurs, and black-painted road units, the closest thing in Shimano's current line to that MT60 Deore is probably this low-end 8-speed Claris. Except for its painted finish (at least it's silver), and somewhat "swoopier" lines, it seems to share quite a bit with my old Deore. I wouldn't be surprised if most of the geometry and other dimensions were pretty much the same. 

The Ultimate Commuter?

Once again, another automotive designer is showing how clueless car-centric thinkers are when it comes to bicycles and the needs of bicyclists.

I saw an article on CyclingWeekly that the bike company B'Twin has teamed up with Volkswagen designer Xavier Lescourret to create a concept bike that is supposed to represent the ultimate commuting bike -- the commuting bike of the future.

The claim is that this carbon-fiber wünderbike has all kinds of "clever" features to appeal to anyone who rides their bike to work.

Hmm . . . might these "clever" features include some means to keep rain from soaking the riders' backsides? Or some means to carry all their work essentials with them easily? Well . . . no. But it does have a weird split top tube that is designed to carry a MacBook laptop computer within the main triangle -- "getting rid of the need to carry it on your back" says the article. Ohh -- like a rack and some panniers? Uhh . . . not exactly. In fact, affixing a rack and/or some panniers would be difficult and unlikely. This is apparently a bike for commuters who only carry a Macbook or similar-sized laptop -- and nothing more.

What about fenders? Nope. Nowhere to mount them. This is for commuters who only live in the most arid of climates.

Let's see. Something else I think of when I think about a good commuting bike is the problem of theft prevention. Well, the B'Twin "ultimate commuter of the future" does have an integrated locking cable that pulls out of the frame, serving as a built-in lock. It looks like the kind of cable that a person could cut through with a pair of wire cutters, never mind heavy bolt cutters. Given that everything about this bike practically screams "I'm EXPENSIVE," I imagine it would be quite a target for thieves. Maybe it's best if owners just carry it into the office with them, in which case folding might be considered a clever feature. No, it doesn't fold.

Some commuting cyclists might value comfort on their ride to work, choosing a more upright position for their work bike. Not the commuters of the future, though. The B'Twin concept features a low tucked time-trial position with its bullhorn handlebars. It's for short, fast commutes, and for young commuters with no neck or back issues.

"No shortage of neat features" - except for the kinds of
features that commuters actually need.

Lighting can be an important feature of a good commuting bike - and that is one thing the bike does have. Built-in LED lights on the front and rear. I can only guess that they're of the type that help a person to be seen (which is OK) but not the kind that help the rider to see the road ahead. Serious commuters will likely still end up strapping a headlight with some serious lumens to that bullhorn handlebar.

I'm still trying to figure out what exactly makes the B'Twin/Volkswagen concept bike the "ultimate commuter of the future." Maybe if someone has money to burn, lives within a couple of miles of work, never rides when it's wet, has no worries about theft, and whose only "work essential" is a small laptop, -- then this might actually live up to the billing.

OOHH! I just figured it out. It's the ultimate commuter bike . . . for people who work at home.

Glad we got that sorted.

Schwinn Duo Sport Tandem

I've mentioned once or twice on the blog that I have a tandem in my collection of bikes, but I recently got a request from a reader to write a little about it.

My tandem is a 1989 Schwinn Duo Sport - a model that was made for just a few years - from '89 to '92. It was a decent quality, mid-to-high end tandem that was designed by the Paramount Design Group, but built in Japan. It features oversized butted chrome-moly tubing and - rare for tandems - a fully lugged frame. Schwinn used to offer some really nice fillet-brazed tandems in the Paramount line, but by 1989, as far as I know, those were long gone, and the Duo Sport was sort of a replacement in the performance level tandem market.

When I got mine, almost 10 years ago, it was mostly original, but a little rough-looking.

The original paint scheme was a product of its time - something one might call "Miami Vice."  The paint doesn't look bad from a distance, but up close it was very tired-looking. There were a lot of places where paint was worn down to the steel, and there was some rust poking through the white paint. Many of the components were original, but a few parts had been replaced at some point. I don't know what was up with those saddles. They have vinyl coverings that almost appear to be shower caps, but on closer examination seemed to be a permanent part of the saddles. Weird - and ugly.

Those original brake levers were badly scarred, so I ended up replacing them. According to the '89 Schwinn catalog, the original stem would have been by Cinelli (!) but a previous owner must have replaced it with this high-rise, dirt-drop type of stem. That's fine, as it actually puts the bars into a good position for me. 

The cranks and derailleurs were all original. It had SunTour Accushift indexing 6 speed shifting, with bar end levers. The rear seat post was a junk replacement, and not even the right size. It was fitted with a shim to make it work. The bike had 48-spoke 27-in. wheels on Suzue hubs -- good quality for the time, but verging on obsolescence today. 

I took the bike apart completely and sent the frame off for powder coating in a pretty classy olive green. I kept a lot of the original components, but made a few notable changes. Those included new brake levers to replace the scuffed originals and a pair of sprung Brooks leather saddles. I wrapped the bars in cotton tape with amber shellac to match the saddles.

Although pictured here with the original wheels, I replaced those with a pair of 700c wheels that I built with late-'80s SunTour XC hubs and Velocity Dyad rims. That change gave me a lot more choices for tires, and also gained a few more millimeters of tire clearance in the frame and fork.

Lugs are pretty rare on a tandem, then or now. These have been outlined in gold, which looks pretty cool against the olive green. That is a massive, very beefy fork crown. All the tubes are suitably oversized for tandem duty.

The original brakes were nice-quality Dia Compe U-brakes (essentially center-pull brakes with brazed-on posts) which were a brief fad on mountain bikes in the '80s, then lived on for a while with BMX bikes. The originals didn't have a lot of vertical pad adjustment though, and wouldn't quite adjust enough to work with the smaller diameter 700c wheels. I found a slightly different model of U-brakes that had longer slots for the brake pads that could accommodate the wheel change easily.

That's a honey-colored Brooks B67 saddle for the stoker. I also added some chromoplastic fenders. Notice that the rear brake is brazed below the very stout chain stays -- kind of a throwback to mountain bike fashion in the late '80s. But the lack of flex also makes for very solid braking.

The captain's saddle is a Brooks Flyer - basically a B17 with springs. Notice that unique seat-lug - specifically for tandem use.

The only decal I affixed to the re-built bike was this gold "Schwinn" die-cut vinyl one I found on eBay. It keeps the look simple and classy.

Some other info about the bike: The Duo Sport was offered in two sizes, and this was the larger of the two. The front, or captain's section is a 23" frame, while the rear, or stoker section, is a 21" mixte configuration (the smaller size was 21"/19"). The length of the stoker section on this model is a little shorter than what you'll find on a lot of newer tandems, which might cause some users to feel a little cramped, but actually works fine for my wife, who has a fairly short torso. I'd say the size and configuration actually works quite well for us.

One thing that the bike lacks that would be found on a lot of newer high-end tandems is the inclusion of some kind of drag brake -- such as a drum or disc brake to help scrub off speed on long descents without heating up the rims. This bike doesn't have that, and the spacing of the rear triangle isn't really wide enough to retrofit such a thing. Could the frame be re-spaced a little wider? Probably, but the very stout stays would make it a tough operation. And ultimately, this bike is not used on the kind of demanding terrain where a drag brake would be necessary. As it is, the U-brakes with modern pads give very sure stopping power. Hard core tandemists going on long distance tours might want something more "serious" - but this works great for us.

Prices on Duo Sport tandems today seem to be all over the place. I just spotted a seller on eBay asking $2000 for one in clean original condition. But the bikes show up on eBay and Craigslist all the time, often for well under $1000. At that price, the bikes offer a pretty nice introduction to the tandem world.

Christmas Bike Ride

Unseasonable weather continues, and after all the gifts were exchanged and opened, I got out for a traditional Christmas bike ride.

This was the most Christmasy-looking scene I could find on my ride in the Cuyahoga Valley National Park on this decidedly non-white Christmas. That's the historic Jonathan Hale Homestead, built in 1825 - part of a whole "living history" village in the heart of the national park. 

Mid-40s and cloudy, but no rain in the forecast, it was another nice day to ride. During my ride, I encountered a few hikers and a jogger or two, but surprisingly no other bicyclists apart from some guy on one of those extra upright "comfort-hybrid" bikes (you know the ones -- with totally unnecessary suspension forks and seat posts) who didn't even return my hello wave. Oh, and there was a guy on a Harley Davidson dressed like Santa (the guy was dressed like Santa. The Harley was dressed like, well, you know -- a Harley).

That's the old Everett Road covered bridge in the national park. I remember when it used to be open to car traffic, but it's been bikes and pedestrians-only for at least a couple of decades now.

I took the Rivendell Long-Low for the rides yesterday and today. It's just such a perfect bike for these little rambles through the country. Its long wheelbase and large-volume tires (33.3mm Jack Browns) soak up bumps and keep the bike planted. And the low bottom bracket gives it a nice, low center of gravity. If I could best describe the feel of this bike, I would say that it feels like I sit IN it, not perched ON it. It handles corners smoothly and predictably. The bike is no lightweight (28 pounds, fully equipped as shown), but on the road it feels a lot lighter than it is. Lastly, the aluminum fenders (hammered ones from Velo-Orange) keep me dry when the roads are wet, and look great too. It's a real joy to ride.

That's all for now. I hope wherever you are, the holiday is a nice one for you.

Happy Holidays - 2015

It's Christmas Eve, and here in Akron, Ohio it is 52 degrees and sunny. Not exactly Christmas-season weather - but it's great weather for a bike ride.

White Christmas? Not this year.

We'll have family get-togethers later today and tomorrow - but this morning I managed to take a break from making party dip and wrapping presents to get out for a ride.

That's more like it this year.

Although I only had time to go for about an hour or so, it was still great to be outdoors doing something I love. And it keeps up my long-standing tradition of getting out for a bike ride on or about Christmas. It's a tradition that I manage more often than a person would think likely.

Wherever you are, I hope you get a chance to celebrate the season in one of the best ways I know of. Get out for a ride.

Happy holidays.