Re: [CR]The Crit Touring and Randonneuring bikes

(Example: Framebuilding:Technology)

From: <>
To: George Allen <>,
Subject: Re: [CR]The Crit Touring and Randonneuring bikes
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 23:30:21 +0000

George hit the main points well - the Randonneur bike is really for a fairly light load. A rack on the rear intended to dry a jacket perhaps would also fit into the scheme I think. But load on the rear tends to cause trouble - especially when the front end geometry is optimized for a handlebar bag. Regarding the "fast" riders, though, it should be remembered that the fastest rider from America at PBP this past year was Jan Heine on his vintage Alex Singer. With the weather this year, some riders may again remember why fenders can be a very good idea!

Mike Kone in Boulder CO USA
Rene Herse Bicycles Inc / Boulder Bicycle

-------------- Original message --------------
From: George Allen

> Essentially, I would say that randonneuring bikes would lack racks for
> panniers and be lighter overall than a bike for fully loaded touring.
> Some of these randoneurs can average 20 MPH for hours on end so weight
> matters. A bike made with heavier tubing for fully loaded touring with
> panniers and the associated racks is just not appropriate. I'm sure that
> brevets could be and have been completed on such bikes but given the
> distances and time constraints I'd much prefer a lighter bike. Having
> said all that, the bikes I've seen in brevets and PBP have run the gamut
> from fixed gear Raleigh Pros to Colnago C50s with everything imaginable
> in between. The faster riders tend to be on more race-oriented bikes
> with very little baggage. It seems a front bag is more of a French thing
> and a saddle bag more of an English thing. Integrated lighting would
> seem to be mandatory but faster riders on brevets up to 400KM would
> probably never need them, at least in the summer. Even on longer rides
> I've seen plenty of riders using basic battery powered lights.
> My criteria for a randoneuring bike would include the following:
> Dynohub powered front light mounted on a front rack supporting a small bag
> Some type of integrated tail light (although I always wear two more
> somewhere on my back)
> Fenders (or mudguards if you're in England)
> Relaxed, comfortable geometry since your butt's in the saddle for a
> long, long time
> Overall weight as light as possible without sacrificing reliability
> Anything more is not necessary and detrimental from a weight standpoint.
> Anything less diminishes safety, comfort and/or convenience. All of the
> above is just my opinion and subject to change without notice nor apology.
> George Allen
> Lexington, KY
> Tom Sanders wrote:
> >I haven't heard anyone comment on the different steering technique that a
> >Crit bike seems to demand. Besides slipping easily through packed riders,
> >the bars are perhaps narrower because less steering is done with them and
> >more done with one's butt on the saddle. My first one was all set for its'
> >test ride after assembly. It had rained earlier and the pavement was a
> >little damp. I rode over to my daughter's house to show it to her and as
> >her car was not in the drive way when I got there I made a U-Turn in the
> >street to head back. I used about the usual lean and steer and was amazed
> >to see it tuning in about half the normal turning radius.suddenly the rear
> >tire broke traction on the pavement and I very nearly went down in a most
> >spectacular fashion! After that I sort learned a technique of steering
> >very little with the bars and shifting the butt on the saddle for most
> >corrections.sure worked better for me! A more subtle hand and body movement
> >is needed for bikes with this geometry for sure.
> >
> >Now a question that has been nagging me. Is a Randonneur bike merely a
> >touring bike intended to carry less load? Maybe not the hundred pounds of
> >stuff one might have on a cross country stint, but, say, forty pounds like
> >one might have for a night or two on the road? The term Randonneur has
> >picked up so much popularity these days that suddenly everyone has a
> >Randonneuring bike instead of a Touring bike.Is there a real difference in
> >bikes that I am not picking up on? Surely just the presence of a randonneur
> >handlebar does not make it a Randonneuring bike? I notice that these
> >latter sometimes lack this bar, anyway, in current descriptions). Lighter
> >racks make the bike as clothes sometimes make the man?
> >
> >Pondering if I have not sold some folks like Jerry Moos Touring bikes when
> >they were really Randonneuring bikes (Jerry, you might owe me some more
> >$$$!) The builder did refer to them as Sport Tourers, though.
> >
> >Tom Sanders
> >
> >Lansing, Mi USA
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.